Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 8589 invoked by uid 500); 16 Apr 2002 23:37:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 8567 invoked from network); 16 Apr 2002 23:37:38 -0000 X-Authentication-Warning: cancer.clove.org: jerenk set sender to jerenkrantz@apache.org using -f Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 16:37:45 -0700 From: Justin Erenkrantz To: dev@httpd.apache.org Subject: Move perchild to experimental? Message-ID: <20020416163745.X11810@apache.org> Mail-Followup-To: Justin Erenkrantz , dev@httpd.apache.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Would people have issues if we move perchild to experimental? We're getting a number of PRs related to perchild because it isn't working. For the next release, I think it would be a bit better if we made it somewhat obvious that perchild isn't expected to work. -- justin