Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 12:25:36 -0700
From: Justin Erenkrantz <jerenkrantz@apache.org>
To: Aaron Bannert <aaron@clove.org>, dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Going to 2.1? was Re: authentication rewrite
Message-ID: <20020828192536.GB24325@apache.org>
Mail-Followup-To: Justin Erenkrantz <jerenkrantz@apache.org>,
	Aaron Bannert <aaron@clove.org>, dev@httpd.apache.org
References: <20020828000219.GH21273@apache.org>
 <20020828111846.C56274-100000@foem.leiden.webweaving.org>
 <20020828115052.GP21273@apache.org> <20020828174200.GQ13980@clove.org>
 <20020828183702.GA24325@apache.org> <20020828185742.GT13980@clove.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20020828185742.GT13980@clove.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i

On Wed, Aug 28, 2002 at 11:57:42AM -0700, Aaron Bannert wrote:
> This is a big enough of a change that I would be willing to allow
> for a branch to 2.1 at this point (not a full new repository, just
> a cvs branch) so that you and others who are interested can work on
> the auth stuff, and so we don't break the configs in 2.0's auth.

branches in CVS are awful (perhaps not so with SVN though).

Not to mention our repository is "httpd-2.0" - I don't think it makes
sense to have a 2.1 in there.  

I'm not entirely sold on splitting off to a 2.1 yet, but I think we
now have something where it is worth discussing it.  -- justin