httpd-docs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
Subject Re: Auth: Start the httpd-2.1 branch finally?
Date Sat, 12 Oct 2002 04:47:07 GMT
On Fri, 11 Oct 2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:

> At 11:21 PM 10/11/2002, wrote:
> >I am so sick of this conversation.  2.0 isn't done yet.  It won't be done
> >until it is actually stable, and it isn't currently stable.
> Fine.  That's no reason to deprecate modules mid-stream.  Was it a good
> choice to rename mod_access to mod_auth_host?  Well, I suppose it
> makes much more sense, from our view.  But from a common sense
> administrators view, that's OS Coders fsking around with naming for
> the sake of changing the names.  And it does them no practical good.

Then put the old modules back in.  They still work, they just don't work
as well.

> >But, you have worn me down.  Create a new fscking tree, populate it and
> >begin working on it.  I will be finishing 2.0.
> My analogy was bad.  Let me rephrase.
> 1.3 is mixed, baked and now cooling down.
> 2.0 is mixed, still baking and won't cool down for a while.
> I'm asking that we move Justin's changes to 2.1 and start mixing
> the danged thing already.
> And let that not stop anyone from fixing bugs!!!  When the right fix is a straightforward
change to some borked code, apply it to both trees at once.
> If the right fix is to redesign the server, axe a module, or whatever, then lets
> do that in a 2.1 tree.

In other words, stop all new development in 2.0.  Nope.  It's bogus, the
server is ready for it.

> >And yes, this is very harshly worded.  We have had this conversation
> >multiple times, and everytime, the same people want to branch, and the
> >same people want to stabilize the server.  If you can't deal with taking
> >the time to stabilize the server, then branch the tree.  But, do not even
> >think of saying that the MMN of 2.0 can't change just because you have
> >created a new tree.
> Of course the httpd project will always have cross purposes by the coders
> and other contributors.  Everyone here has itches to scratch.  That's GOOD!  
> If we didn't, this project would be dead long ago.
> I'm asking for Justin''s revamp to come out of 2.0.  I'm suggesting it go 
> immediately into a new tree.  If that is reasonable to people, please say so.
> If I'm being unreasonable, please point that out.
> I'm suggesting that Justin's change doesn't stabilize the tree.  You want
> us all rowing with you in the same direction.  That isn't open source
> development within the Apache framework.  That's "Joes' Project" on
> sourceforge, or the Linux model.  It's not the Apache way.

I absolutely hate the phrase "the Apache way".  I hate it for a simple
reason.  Nobody knows what the hell it is.  HAve you noticed yet that
people throw it around when they want things to work their way?  I haven't
asked everybody to do what I say.  I personally have a couple of projects
that I care about, and I am ignoring the rest of the BS.  But I worked too
damned hard, as did a lot of other people, to move on to 2.1 just when
people are starting to port their modules to 2.0.  You are being
unreasonable.  This was disucsssed, you were a part of the discussion.  It
was decided to put this stuff into the 2.0 tree.  Justin updated the docs,
there was some small discussion over how to deal with having docs for both
sets of modules.  That hasn't been resolved yet.

> So rather than argue, let's provide the tree for folks to explore their new
> efforts.  Won't be in anyone's way.  In fact, it will improve the stability
> of the GA branch, which is something I believe ALL of us desire.

Because it won't have an impact on the 2.0 tree.  I and others will
continue to improve Apache 2.0 to solve people's problems.  All it will
do, is confuse users, and make it harder to fix problems.

Like I said, feel free to branch, but nobody should even try to state that
becasue 2.1 was started 2.0 can't have an MMN bump.  2.0 is in it's
infancy as a GA server.  There are still a lot of changes that can and
should happen to it.  That is a part of the product lifecycle.  deal with


Ryan Bloom               
550 Jean St
Oakland CA 94610

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message