httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Handler <handler-list-new-ht...@grendel.net>
Subject Re: daemontools/foreground support in 1.3.*
Date Fri, 01 Mar 2002 06:03:33 GMT
| I am of the mind that it should not be added, but I won't stop anyone
| if they garner 3 +1s from actual testing and feedback.

Anyone willing to step up with any +1s? It's an easy compile and test,
folks; just remember to run it under a shell without job control.

Justin Erenkrantz <jerenkrantz@ebuilt.com> writes:

> I have added it to our contrib section for now:
> http://www.apache.org/dist/httpd/contrib/patches/1.3/daemontools.patch

Are you, or someone else, willing to commit to updating this location
with the new version of the patch I'll generate for each successive
version of 1.3? If not, I'd rather you removed this patch from this
location, as I'd rather maintain it on my web server where I can
update it without having to wait on the free time of anyone else.

> I have also added a note in 1.3's STATUS.

Thank you.

> And, BTW, I would appreciate it if people would stop spreading
> FUD like 2.0 "arguably won't be [ready] for some time."  It's
> in production usage right now.  *You* may not judge it production
> quality - most of us do.

You're entitled to your opinion, and me to mine. The simple truth
from my perspective is that on March 10, 2002, it will have been
two years since the first release of Apache 2.0 alpha. That's an
awfully long development period, and unabashed ground-up rewrites
of giant software projects that ALSO introduce substantial new
features are, to me and most of my sysadmin friends that I have
discussed this with, something that makes us nervous. I'm going to
have to do exhaustive testing of the various functionality of 2.0
before I'm comfortable releasing it into production in my environment,
and I'm going to do so slowly, cautiously, and while closely watching
the experiences of others.

I'm not directly critiquing the development process for 2.0; I
wasn't involved, and I have no claim that I could have done it
better. I AM saying that I think you are underestimating the initial
resistance that the 2.0 final release is going to encounter, and
how long the later/final releases of 1.3.* are going to hang around.

This is not an argument for backporting a substantial portion of
2.0's new functionality, or making any other substantial changes,
but merely for applying a twenty line patch that has been tested
for the last eleven versions and would demonstratably simplify the
lives of sysadmins who gratefully run your package at many, many
sites.

What high-volume sites is 2.0 running on other than daedalus and
icarus?

-- 
handler@grendel.net (michael handler)                           washington, dc

Mime
View raw message