Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of trawick@gmail.com designates
 74.125.46.157 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        b=XHZMSJaCfrpswAGSFmazbu31Op1zYKx7DROAMtWIMJ4QHX+hXs8NFuJvSBHWfpNd9b
         pz0uzlgFSiGSVP3YUP0C+bu2mCsuLuKjytvlNi+pFIXhCHrw5PQfACBQDXhQMc23LUXl
         uCb3GAzA2l76eIbFjfdgDYCOPreiPb1nVOchE=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <49C027C8.6010005@pearsoncmg.com>
References: <496ABECF.9060202@rowe-clan.net> <4976322A.8030505@rowe-clan.net>
	 <4978CD2D.4000600@pearsoncmg.com> <49792A45.1060904@rowe-clan.net>
	 <497E2BBB.6050200@pearsoncmg.com> <497F47F0.9010808@pearsoncmg.com>
	 <ED4D3138-6573-455C-BB62-6DE21DFE3ADA@gbiv.com>
	 <499C7A05.8040605@pearsoncmg.com>
	 <39F19272-5AD1-421F-924B-8CD4C8BA8B45@gbiv.com>
	 <49C027C8.6010005@pearsoncmg.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 13:51:46 -0400
Message-ID: <cc67648e0903181051h29554051waa39ced801aa93ca@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [summary] accept mod_fcgid codebase into httpd project
From: Jeff Trawick <trawick@gmail.com>
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001517570850538adc04656856f1

--001517570850538adc04656856f1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Chris Darroch <chrisd@pearsoncmg.com>wrote:

>
>  I'm +1 on the idea of moving toward inclusion in httpd trunk
> as a module, at least as a longer-term goal.  My thoughts were:
>
> - Start by branching httpd/mod_fcgid/branches/2.x/mod_fcgid based on
>  the current relicensed code, just in case an "emergency" turns up
>  (security bug?) and we'd like to do a release based on the existing
>  code; most likely, we won't use this going forward.


Many people use mod_fcgid on Apache 2.0/2.2.  The message should be that
mod_fcgid development has moved to the ASF, and existing users are not being
left behind in the transition.  So a branch for mod_fcgid 2.x is maintained
for httpd 2.0/2.2 users just as our own stable branches are maintained (FAR
beyond emergencies, at least for 2.2.x).

This isn't necessarily in opposition to what you said, but some might read
it as something like "Apache took over and they won't distribute fixes that
work with my existing configurations except in extreme circumstances."

(But of course we should include in httpd trunk for Apache 2.4 and beyond,
and make any appropriate changes for consistency, new directions, etc.)

- Before we can add to httpd trunk, we need to look at the directive
>  names.  There are a large number of config directives with names
>  that don't imply FastCGI and in some cases are a little mysterious.
>  I don't think we can drop 32 new directives into httpd with generic
>  names like "SocketPath" and "PassHeader".


Trunk is a fine place to address those issues.

BTW, thanks for all your work on this!!!

--001517570850538adc04656856f1
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Chris Darroch <=
span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:chrisd@pearsoncmg.com">chrisd@pearso=
ncmg.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=
=3D"border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; p=
adding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
 =A0I&#39;m +1 on the idea of moving toward inclusion in httpd trunk<br>
as a module, at least as a longer-term goal. =A0My thoughts were:<br>
<br>
- Start by branching httpd/mod_fcgid/branches/2.x/mod_fcgid based on<br>
=A0the current relicensed code, just in case an &quot;emergency&quot; turns=
 up<br>
=A0(security bug?) and we&#39;d like to do a release based on the existing<=
br>
=A0code; most likely, we won&#39;t use this going forward.</blockquote><div=
><br>Many people use mod_fcgid on Apache 2.0/2.2.=A0 The message should be =
that mod_fcgid development has moved to the ASF,
and existing users are not being left behind in the transition.=A0 So a bra=
nch for mod_fcgid 2.x is maintained for httpd 2.0/2.2 users just as our own=
 stable branches are maintained (FAR beyond emergencies, at least for 2.2.x=
).<br>

<br>This isn&#39;t necessarily in opposition to what you said, but some mig=
ht read it as something like &quot;Apache took over and they won&#39;t dist=
ribute fixes that work with my existing configurations except in extreme ci=
rcumstances.&quot;<br>
<br>(But of course we should include in httpd trunk for Apache 2.4 and beyo=
nd, and make any appropriate changes for consistency, new directions, etc.)=
<br><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px s=
olid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
- Before we can add to httpd trunk, we need to look at the directive<br>
=A0names. =A0There are a large number of config directives with names<br>
=A0that don&#39;t imply FastCGI and in some cases are a little mysterious.<=
br>
=A0I don&#39;t think we can drop 32 new directives into httpd with generic<=
br>
=A0names like &quot;SocketPath&quot; and &quot;PassHeader&quot;.</blockquot=
e><div><br>Trunk is a fine place to address those issues.<br></div></div><b=
r>BTW, thanks for all your work on this!!!<br><br>

--001517570850538adc04656856f1--