Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of apache-dev@m.gmane.org
 designates 80.91.229.12 as permitted sender)
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
From: "Paul Smedley" <pauldespam@despamsmedley.id.au>
Subject: Re: criteria for axing MPMs from the tree
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 09:23:07 +0000 (UTC)
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <POn1Xm9ddZOp-pn2-dGi1XlN9pH3K@localhost>
References: <C9428CE0-3877-4B1B-91E0-838BCBEBCD3F@jaguNET.com>
 <0015174bdfd8b2e4a60466068a4c@google.com>
 <POn1Xm9ddZOp-pn2-IjD4szxhmYf3@smedley.info> <4A817150.7070103@webthing.com>
 <4A81DEAB.7000109@gmail.com>
Reply-To: paul@smedley.id.au
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
User-Agent: ProNews/2 V1.60.cp125
Sender: news <news@ger.gmane.org>

Hi Brian,

On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 21:12:11 UTC, Brian Havard 
<brian.havard@gmail.com> wrote:

> Nick Kew wrote:
> > Paul Smedley wrote:
> >
> >>> [ ] yank BeOS MPM from trunk
> >>> [ ] yank OS/2 MPM from trunk
> >>>
> >>> (I'm +1 on both votes)
> >>
> >> Sorry for the late response, but if there is no current OS/2
> >> maintainer for APR and httpd - I'm happy to take on that role.
> >>
> >> I've been building Apache2 on OS/2 for the last 4 years or so, I just
> >> enver got around to submitting patches.  If the support is pulled, it
> >> will make my life harder continuing to maintain the port.
> >
> > If you've been maintaining it independently to date, you could
> > presumably continue to do so on exactly the same basis if it
> > were pulled from the official release.  So that's one option.
> >
> > I see you've posted a patch to dev@apr.  I am, alas, not
> > competent to review it.  If anyone on the APR and HTTPD
> > projects has OS2 and the time to review it, maybe this
> > could be a start to reviving OS2 support, and to your
> > working with the apache community.
> 
> I know I've been absent for a long time but I once again have a bit of
> spare time so I can review, test & commit patches from Paul. Does anyone
> object if I start by bringing the OS/2 MPM back from the dead?
> Specifically, reversing r758899?

Just a comment regarding testing - I assume you only have an EMX 
environment? I'm using klibc for all my stuff - 
http://svn.netlabs.org/klibc 

It would be good to ensure that I don't break anything for EMX :)

-- 
Cheers,

Paul.