httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Fritsch ...@sfritsch.de>
Subject Re: MPM-Event, renaming MaxClients, etc.
Date Tue, 21 Jun 2011 18:10:17 GMT
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 7:22 PM, Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com> wrote:
>> My point wasn't the warning, actually, but rather the fact that a config
>> that uses MaxRequestWorkers (instead of MaxClients) will abort an instance
>> of httpd 2.2.x.  Hence, a person upgrading to 2.4.x will get tripped up
>> if they try to do so incrementally with shared config files across
>> many web servers, unless they happen to notice that this change is
>> merely cosmetic and they keep MaxClients instead.
>>
>> For a trivial improvement like this, we should make it easier on admins
>> by backporting the alias to 2.2.x (even if we do not use it on 2.2.x).
>>
>> ....Roy
>
> Many (most?) admins will be encountering other one-way changes (e.g.,
> AcceptMutex,SSLMutex -> Mutex).  Using one config for both 2.2.x and
> 2.4.x is going to be an IfVersion exercise.
>
> I think they'd be better served with an IfVersion cheatsheet at the
> bottom of http://httpd.apache.org/docs/trunk/upgrading.html than with
> addressing a subset of changes by adding compatibility code to 2.2.x.

I also can't imagine any config running without changes. Think of 
mod_access_compat now being required for Allow/Deny/Satisfy/Order.

I am not against backporting things that make upgrading easier. But we 
should wait with that until 2.4.0 is out and then see which changes would 
actually make sense.

Cheers,
Stefan

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/mixed (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message