httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject Re: Time for a 2.3/2.4 branch?
Date Sun, 04 Oct 2009 21:28:33 GMT
Paul Querna wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 11:48 AM, Jim Jagielski <jim@jagunet.com> wrote:
>>>
>> Yep. My only fear, as you state, is without some clear consensus that
>> we want to get a 2.4 out "sometime soon", we will be stuck in that
>> never-ending loop of polishing the turd. ;)
> 
> start cutting alpha releases :-)
> 
> last timed we tried trunk on www.apache.org it didn't go so well...
> so... we should do that again.

+1 - note that to get from alpha to GA, the biggest problem right now is the state
of docs (as Stefan hinted at).  LOTS of modules are entirely undocumented.  We might
want to look at these and consider dumping these from the next 2.4 release if no
documentation magically appears, courtesy of their authors.

But documentation need not block an alpha :)

My worries about going GA today mostly revolve around;

 * introduction of many new hard-dependencies rather than registered functions
   (one solution; for the guilty to go back and correct their designs or revert)

 * problematic design of ap_internal_fast_redirect (solution; replace all calls
   within httpd to ap_internal_redirect, then remove it entirely)

 * problematic design of <Limit>  - looks like it's time to commit <Method>
   since it's probably premature to lock in all users to use mod_lua (remaining
   issue; determining where the <Method> merge is evaluated)

 * problematic introduction of redundant (and often error-prone) code.  For example,
   socache moves us partly in the right direction, but didn't remove the redundant
   directive handlers from the many consumers (fortunately I'm writing an socache
   consumer right now, so I'm likely to just address this)

 * undocumented modules and new features (solution; document, or remove from
   final release branch)

None of these are months-long efforts, it's just a matter of enough contributors
who would be looking to polish up trunk/, in proportion to those dedicating dozens
of man-months to reviewing backports to yesterday's server :)


Mime
View raw message