Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 13:30:14 -0800 (PST)
From: Sander van Zoest <sander@vanZoest.com>
To: <dev@httpd.apache.org>
Subject: RE: OT: whither are we going?
In-Reply-To: <00b601c1bf09$c8de0950$7f00000a@KOJ>
Message-ID: <20020226131631.B68505-100000@vision.estjohn.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Tue, 26 Feb 2002, Ryan Bloom wrote:

> > MAJOR code change to a large part of the code (Ryan, if you did not,
> > then my apologies on naming you.  IE the per-child MPM stuff).
> The scariest thing about this conversation is that it was sparked by a
> commit that added two comments.  Even worse, those two comments
> essentially suggested a way to move forward on a bug that many people
> have filed bugs about.  And finally, the comments didn't say anything
> about how pervasive the changes would be.

The two comments mentioned that the "PerChild MPM" is to be "re-written".
Which was interpreted as a rewrite of the entire MPM code base.

If it only requires changes in the "Per Child" MPM and no changes in the
general MPM codebase, I do not think people will complain. In some
sense PerChild has been broken for a long time and probably should be
considered experimental.

Cheers,

--
Sander van Zoest                                          sander@vanzoest.com
San Diego, CA, US                                 http://Sander.vanZoest.com/