httpd-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Joseph A. Nagy, Jr." <>
Subject Re: [users@httpd] [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache HTTP Server 1.3.31 Released
Date Wed, 12 May 2004 00:42:52 GMT
On Tue, May 11, 2004 at 05:30:19PM -0700, Purl Gurl wrote the following:
> Joseph A. Nagy, Jr. wrote:
> (snipped)
> > If we are wanting people to code modules for Apache 2.x, why are we still
> > supporting 1.3.x? I can understand bug fixes and such but even then I would
> > have figured that there would be a concerted effort to get people to move to
> > Apache 2.x so module developers will have no choice but to port their
> > modules to it.
> Apache 1.3.x series is the most stable and the
> best version of Apache ever released. It would
> be major mistake to drop development of this
> specific series.

I completely disagree.

> Apache 2.x is very nice, feature rich but is 
> extremely buggy, is not stable and severely
> limits usage of third party software.

Buggy? Not stable? I run a production web server using Apache 2, Perl 5.8
and the latest version of PHP with no problem. The only problem I have is
lack of module designers wanting to port their modules.

> Problems with PHP and Zone Alarm are classic
> examples. Perl zombies under Win32, another
> of the numerous problems with the 2.x series.

Zone Alarm is a piece of crap, but that's another issue entirely. Zone Alarm
is not meant for a production server (although I've run Apache 1.3.x on
Win32 with ZoneAlarm, nothing but problems from Zone Alarm). It's meant for
a home, desktop machine. I don't know of any 2.x problems on Win32 because I
refuse to use Win32 as a server for any reason. Win32 is a POOR choice of
server used by PHBs who try to make themselves look good to the CEOs and
only wind up getting fired when their server is cracked or otherwise

> Again, dropping development and support of
> the 1.3.x series would certainly be a fatal
> mistake on the part of Apache developers;
> Apache 2.x is not all that marketable.

And it won't be until more effort is put into it instead of 1.3.x

2.x is meant to completely replace 1.3.x

> Certainly, in the future, Apache 2.x will be
> of very high quality. For now, there are
> literally thousands of administrators who
> will not use 2.x series having a need for
> stability and compatibility.

And I bet every one of them use Win32 as the server platform. I know
of literally thousands of people who use Apache 2.x under Linux with little
to no problem.

> Regards,
> Kira

Oh yeah, my machine is not only a production server but a work station.

Apache 2.x is fast, stable, secure and ready for wide spread deployment.

AIM: pres CTHULHU	ICQ: 18115568	Yahoo: pagan_prince
Jabber: DarkKnightRadick@(|
PGP: 0x642F7BDA

View raw message