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: Volunteers to drive an MSI build
Date Mon, 11 Mar 2013 19:11:01 GMT
On Mon, 11 Mar 2013 14:41:48 +0000
Dwayne Miller <Dwayne.Miller@nc4.us> wrote:

> I'm rejoining this list after several years of inactivity.  I'm
> joining primarily in regards to this thread.
> 
> I would like to help if possible.

We are starting from scratch with 2.4.x.  Several key reasons;

 - Long past time to shift to an OSS msi packaging solution.
 - ... with a package schema which supports 'upgrade'
 - ... and rewrites utf-8 paths within the stock .conf files
 - Deploys cgi-bin/conf/logs/htdocs/proxy/cache to a non-static,
   path outside of program files (perhaps a tree beneath
   c:\Program Data\Apache Software Foundatation\,
   but why
   is that hidden?)



> I'm also curious as to the reason for the absence of the MSI build
> for the two most recent releases?  Is this a volunteer issue?  Is it
> a technology issue?  A license issue?

Well first off, they are always a convenience.  ASF projects release
source code.  Some ship binaries or jars for user convenience, but 
those aren't releases.  Binaries are largely left to platform packagers
as you'll see looking for a long list of platforms underneath
http://www.apache.org/dist/httpd/binaries/ .  Netware and Win32 had
traditionally had these since there weren't 'packagers' in the unix
sense of the term.

A system crash on this volunteer's box led to the gap for Windows.
Which has led me to creating VM's for antique VC6 (httpd 2.2) and
modern Visual studio so I never have this ordeal again.  Almost had 
this resolved at ApacheCon until I realized I had six database devel
packages to install for all supported apr-util dbd/dbm backends.
Should be wrapped up in the next couple of days now that I'm back
at my own office after an extended stay in Portland.

But that catches us up with 2.2.23 and 2.2.24 builds, see above why
I had held off of 2.4.x releases.  Once we ship one 2.4.x MSI there
will be no incentive to get this right until 3.x.

> I have read the list, and just not sure what triggered the topic
> after years of MSI builds being available on the site.

See bullet list above.

> I have started looking at the MSI project code, the instructions for
> building in a windows environment (I normally build for Mac OSX, but
> have access to Windows/MS tools too).  Hopefully I'll be caught up
> soon.

Sounds great.

> Disclaimer: This message is intended only for the use of the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
> information which is privileged, confidential, proprietary, or exempt
> from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended
> recipient or the person responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are strictly prohibited from disclosing,
> distributing, copying, or in any way using this message. If you have
> received this communication in error, please notify the sender and
> destroy and delete any copies you may have received.

Really?  You violated that disclaimer under your own volition
publishing your note to  public forum. But we would really rather 
not read that sort of claptrap on the public dev lists, thanks.

Mime
View raw message