httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "David Reid" <dr...@jetnet.co.uk>
Subject Re: 2.1 Fallout; httpd v.s. httpd-2.0
Date Mon, 25 Nov 2002 17:03:07 GMT
Reading emails like this remind me of the days when I really wonder why
anyone would ever want to participate in the project... sigh...

david

> At 08:30 AM 11/25/2002, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> >David Reid wrote:
>
> [Will recalls Marc Slemco stating:]
>
> >> > If you are looking at 2.1 being as different from 2.0 as 1.3 and 2.0
are,
> >> > then perhaps a branch isn't the best idea.  But if you are looking at
> >> > having that many differences before 2.0 has even had a chance to
stablize,
> >> > I think you are asking for trouble and how to manage the CVS
repository
> >> > would be the least of the worries...
> >>
> >> Hmm, a nice summary of my own feelings and concerns. :)
> >>
> >
> >And mine as well (and a concern I had since the topic was 1st mentioned/
> >suggested many moons ago). The 2.1 branch makes sens iff the intent
> >is to place 2.0 in API and feature "freeze" and work on stabilizing
> >and tuning the code, not that "we're bored with 2.0 and want to work
> >on the next cool verson and all this crud about keeping 2.0
> >stable and robust is really slowing down my creative juices" ;)
> >
> >Not that anyone is saying, or has said that.
>
> Nope.  Folks have asked that 2.0 stop being a sandbox for those next cool
> features and that we get 2.0 code working.  However, folks want to proceed
> with the next cool features.  Why ask them to quit it?
>
> Since most of the active committers, (first in terms of applying their own
> and others' bug fixes, and secondly still participants in the project)
> expressed content with having a separate stable tree and a sandbox for
> continued work, and a vote was conducted for a month with not so much
> as a -0, I won't be too frustrated when folks start rehashing the decision
> for the next year.  You may as well also start venting over how poor the
> old 1.3 is doing (but don't go fixing it, that would take away all the fun
> of griping about it :-)
>
> Which takes us to the question raised by the three of you.  It's Apache.
> You scratch Your own itch.  If that's maintenance (as Jeff, myself, and
> many others including yourselves keep persisting in) then that's cool.
> If that itch is new development, such as auth refactoring, async overhaul
> or factoring out the filesystem, then that's cool too.
>
> Participate how you like; that's the point of *this* Apache project.  Even
> the backseat drivers are welcome here :-)
>
> Bill
>
>


Mime
View raw message