httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Graham Leggett <>
Subject Re: [proposed] 2.4 Maintenance SIG
Date Tue, 03 Jan 2017 08:18:48 GMT
On 03 Jan 2017, at 2:11 AM, William A Rowe Jr <> wrote:

> So far, discussions are polarized on a single axis...
> East: Let's work on 3.0; whatever is going on in 2.4 won't distract me, I won't spend
time reviewing enhancements, because 3.0 is the goal.
> West: Let's keep the energy going on 2.4 enhancements, I won't spend time on 3.0 usability
because it isn't ready or necessary.
> There is a disconnect, because 'East' folks can't actually put up with the breakage introduced
by enhancements they can't review on 2.4, but all feel responsible to keeping 2.4 usable to
> So I'd like to know, in light of a perpetual chain of (often build and/or run-time breaking
regression) enhancements, if there is support for a 2.4.24.x release chain during the 3.0
transition? And support for potentially 3x backports to 2.4.x, 2.4.24.x and 2.2.x, of really
serious bug fixes?
> It's clear this project doesn't agree, so the question twists to how we agree to disagree.

Can you clarify the problem you’re trying to solve?

v3.0 and v2.6 are just numbers. For modest changes, we move to v2.6. For a very large architecture
change (for example, the addition of filters in v1.x to v2.x), we move to 3.0.

Is there a very large architecture change planned by anybody?

In my experience, things that felt initially like big changes have actually turned out to
be rather modest changes that are still possible to backport to v2.4 without an issue. For
this reason I haven’t seen a reason to push very hard for v2.6, never mind v3.0.


View raw message