httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jorge Schrauwen <jorge.schrau...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] release httpd mod_ftp-0.9.3 beta?
Date Sat, 30 May 2009 12:20:49 GMT
~Jorge



On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 2:27 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
<wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> Guenter Knauf wrote:
>> Sure that its possible to specify the full path at commandline, but tell
>> me a reason why we should make it harder for users than needed?
>
> The question is; which forks are we accommodating?  What scope?  .1% of
> installed userbase?  (whoops - better restore win9x quick!)  Seriously,
> if someone is using the fork, and grabbing packages, they just grab the
> mod_ftp package, so no big deal.
>
> Totally cool with adding a note to README-FTP about the APXS=apxs2 trick
> for those affected.
>
I'm for this as well.
People using the modded distro packages will most likely also install
mod_ftp from that distro.
The people that use say a distro's 1.3 package or a alt vendor package
in combination with a manual compile/vanilla implementation will most
hopefully be smart enough to understand the little changes that are
needed.

Personally I think that if distro's want to modify httpd to fit their
needs it also their job to modify modules to work with there modified
version.

I'm not saying we shouldn't make it easy to provide and alternative
path for apxs it being a little config mod or be it a parameter.

> I'm not disagreeing that it's potentially stupid for us to ship 'apxs'.
> I'm disagreeing that the appropriate place to fix conventions is here.
> And if folks don't want to play in such an open ecosystem, there is next
> to nothing we are going to fix in this, but we don't have to become party
> to perpetuating it.  Watching the good folks at users@, #httpd etc tear
> their hair out at vendor stupidity or cleverness is not 'fun'.
>
>
>

Mime
View raw message