httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aaron Bannert <>
Subject Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0/server/mpm/worker worker.c
Date Wed, 01 May 2002 22:27:37 GMT
> Because we have to keep the old API working, and because duplicating code
> everywhere is a bad thing.

How is it duplicated? This is new code.

> And while we are on the topic, anything that is posted to the mailing
> list is open for others to commit to the code base.  That is how we work.
> People here are expected to be part-time volunteers, so if one person does
> 60% of the work and posts it, others should feel free to do the other 40%
> and commit the sucker while the originator is sleeping.  The only necessary
> part is that it be appropriately attributed in Submitted By.

If you go back and read my original post, you'll realize that the reason
I posted it was so that I could get some feedback. If I thought it only
needed one +1 I wouldn't have posted it. I don't think 2 days (partly
over a weekend) is enough time for everyone to review a patch with such
ugly side-effects.

Furthermore, this patch still has outstanding issues which I think
warrant discussion:

- Will the log message confuse people? Greg suggests we drop the level down
  during forcefull restart/shutdown.
- Does this work on all platforms (linux)?
- Have we beaten this enough to call it release quality?

> In this case, there is no excuse for sitting on a bug fix just because
> there are stylistic issues about a patch.  The appropriate thing to do
> is remove the style changes and commit the fix.

I don't think anyone was sitting on it for stylistic issues, where did
you get that from? Besides, the commit message is inaccurate and partly


View raw message