httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Steffen" <>
Subject Re: Apachelounge problems
Date Sat, 18 Aug 2007 23:40:02 GMT
Thanks for the answer.

I shall keep the site down, I am very disappointed and I feel threatened by 
you for legal stuff.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <>
To: <>
Sent: Sunday, 19 August, 2007 01:31
Subject: Re: Apachelounge problems

> Steffen wrote:
>> This is a big booom for me and some fellow webmasters. And is 
>> disappointing
>> me, special the style you are using. This style gives me the impression 
>> that
>> ASF is not happy with Apache Lounge. Even I tried to promote Apache in 
>> the
>> Windows world.
> I think what you've done for creating a user community around Apache on 
> Win
> is great!  Please don't misunderstand that.
> I've had to bring up this issue before, however, and it's very 
> disappointing
> the message didn't get through.  And just had oral surgery Thursday, so 
> color
> me cranky.
>> I close the site now to further notice, till we sort out this issue.  I 
>> do
>> not want to promote an Apache  when I get this kind of messages in Public
>> form one of the key guys from ASF.
> Well, you should be aware there are no 'key guys' at the httpd project, 
> except
> perhaps for Roy who happens to be the chairman (and he'll sign a note as 
> the
> VP, httpd Project, if he's using that authority).  It's a community of 
> equals.
> There's no reason to shutter the site.  Removing that item is more than 
> enough
> to keep us happy, and to protect yourselves.
>> Just for testing this RC for our small community, we where thinking that 
>> we
>> are helping. And it is stated in in the announcement and the readme says
>> that it is an Apache Lounge Distribution. Just a few are downloading it.
> Maybe you misunderstood.  We want *you* to try your *build* with that RC!
> We don't want it distributed to end users, there's a big difference.
> Let us know what's wrong with the tag, before you would be distributing it
> for the community.  I think we've done a reasonable job keeping up with 
> bug
> fixes in the Win32 build, especially catching up with VC 2005, partly for
> all the feedback you and fellow VS 2005 users have provided!
>> 2.2.5 is at quite some more places to download, see for example:
> Well, it shouldn't be, but that's a matter to bring up with them 
> individually.
> Understand that there is *no* 2.2.5.  It doesn't exist until 3 project 
> mbrs
> have voted +1, there are more +1's than -1's, and the RM declares it baked
> and moves it to  Ok?
>> I feel some emotion in your message, so better that from now on, we 
>> should
>> not test any RC  anymore ?
> Because I brought this up before, last year?  These are for developers to
> verify, they aren't for user testing.  Actually, we are looking at issues
> such as;
> * does it correspond to the tag?
> * is it correctly licensed?
> * is it correctly packaged?
> * are any additions that appear to have IP encumbrances?
> * does it build?
> * does it run?
> * does it pass the perl-framework regression tests?
> Since it isn't a release, you don't want to 'ship' it.
> You just want to let dev@httpd know that you reviewed it, and are +/-1 for
> release, so it gets baked quickly with no issues.  You don't have to do 
> every
> review step I mention above, but just perform the tests you like on the
> platforms you like.
> Having users asking questions about unreleased code just causes grief for 
> the
> users@ community.  You and our other testers know better; but they won't. 
> Once
> we have that vote, and it's our release, it's the ASF's mistake if 
> something
> went wrong.
>> I got:  <>:
>> The e-mail message could not be delivered because the user's mailfolder 
>> is
>> full.
> Weird (?!?) thanks for letting me know that!
> Bill

View raw message