Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Message-ID: <3D84B73F.80707@apache.org>
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2002 09:37:19 -0700
From: Ian Holsman <ianh@apache.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
 rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: mod_custom_log exits too late?
References: <1032078264.1459.63.camel@localhost>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Brian Pane wrote:
> On Sat, 2002-09-14 at 23:40, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> 
>>On Sun, 15 Sep 2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>do you realize how many people HATE having to recompile their modules,
>>>>and what a pain it is for commerical vendors to support?
>>>
>>>No, apparently 90% of this list doesn't share a concern for breaking
>>>existing installs, since this conversation comes up frequently, and
>>>those opinions for consistency and predictability, predictably fail to
>>>carry the day.
>>
>>I've been willing to accept MMN bumps thus far because 1.3 also had a
>>number of MMN bumps in its infancy.  But we're rapidly approaching the
>>point where 2.0.x needs to pick an MMN (and all that that entails) and
>>stick with it, IMHO.
> 
> 
> Then let's make 2.0.42 a "stabilize the interfaces" release.
> 
> I.e., proceed with the release of 2.0.41 now (given all the
> stability and performance fixes, I don't want to delay its
> release any longer), and then spend, say, the next month
> cleaning up APIs for a 2.0.42 release.  That would also
> be a good opportunity to put out a formal call for comments
> from third party module developers before "freezing" the
> API.
> 
+1.
maybe we could sit down and think for 2 seconds and get a plan going
on what we want to see in 2.0 in the next couple of months, and what 
kind of API changes are required to do it, instead of just hacking or 
changing something because (it's ugly, run's .001% faster, supports 
feature XYZ, insert other reason here)

all these constant changes just point to a lack of design & forethought 
by us (the developers) going into 2.0 over the last 6 months.

The proxy code shows this problem all the way through the changelog. 90% 
of the changes done to it were due to API changes, and then reversing 
out that change and re-reversing it back.

as a module developer I don't have the time or patience to constantly 
change things every month.

anyway i've ranted long enough
+1 on making putting some design & forethought into 42
> Brian
> 
>