httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <>
Subject Re: Baffled by the negotation fix...
Date Sun, 03 Mar 2002 01:35:53 GMT
At 4:22 PM -0800 3/2/02, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>On Sat, Mar 02, 2002 at 02:30:34PM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
>> I'm sorry, but this is BOGUS!  I want to see a 2.0 release, but adding
>> code that is wrong just so that we can get a GA release is NOT the way
>> to go about doing that.  The whole point of Open Source is that we don't
>> have to cut corners just to meet release dates.  Do it right, it will
>> take less time in the long run.
>> I am really disappointed that the attitude on this list right now is
>> "ship it soon regardless of quality or maintainability."
>I believe that you are incorrectly trying to introduce stateful
>protocols into an architecture that explicitly forbids it. 
>Furthermore, I don't think you'd be addressing the real problem
>here by adding this extra level of complexity.

Except if we're willing to go 90% to be able to make the Apache framework
protocol (read: HTTP) ignorant, then the framework must not be so short
sited as to assume statelessness. It's easier to add a concept of a
protocol that spans multiple requests and then for HTTP have the
protocol "be" the request timeline, then it is for the reverse.

With all that being said, I think that the fix Ryan's working on might
be sufficient. As far as what should be in 2.0 compared to 2.1, well,
there comes a time when it makes sense to stop polishing the turd.
If we wait for 2.0 to be "perfect" then it'll never go GA. I can both
of your guy's points.
   Jim Jagielski   [|]   [|]
      "A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order
             will lose both and deserve neither" - T.Jefferson

View raw message