I agree that documentation should cover this, but it should also be displayed in the ./configure if someone chooses that, to say, display a warning at the end of the configure or some such thing.
At least there'd be an "I told you so" in there. On Mon, 2002-02-25 at 19:31, Joshua Slive wrote: > > On Mon, 25 Feb 2002, Aaron Bannert wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 04:58:50PM -0800, Brian Pane wrote: > > > > > ...or declaring perchild > > > experimental-use-only (and thus not critical path for GA) and then > > > doing a rewrite at any time. > > > > When we voted on whether perchild was a showstopper or not I > considered > > that to be equivalent to "perchild is experimental, use at your own > risk". > > > > The real question is: How do we make it very obvious that perchild is > > experimental? A big red WARNING somewhere? Perhaps some code in > > configure.in to detect --with-mpm=perchild? > > That's what documentation is for. If people are going to switch to > non-default mpms without reading the documentation, they get what is > coming to them. > > And by the way, +1 on fixing perchild now. I think Ryan should feel > free > to do anything he wants to improve the mpm, as long as it doesn't > involve > major mucking with non-mpm code. The only thing that could break is > perchild, and perchild is broken anyway. > > Joshua. -- Austin Gonyou Systems Architect, CCNA Coremetrics, Inc. Phone: 512-698-7250 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] "It is the part of a good shepherd to shear his flock, not to skin it." Latin Proverb
