At 05:08 PM 3/29/2005, Roy T.Fielding wrote: >On Mar 29, 2005, at 1:36 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote > >Bill, why don't you just fix whatever it is that you think of as >broken rather than send negative votes?
The last release simply came to quickly between announce of the intent and the tarball. As I say they most *all* are fixed now, and were fixed the evening before the tarball was expected to have been rolled. except for apr-iconv which the few commentors are at disagreement. I stopped to explain the right solution to the apr@ list, which I will then commit tomorrow barring any reasonable objections. So plan is patch Wednesday afternoon, tar and vote on apr for the apr-iconv release. Release as early as Thursday if we have 3+1's and httpd will have a new release to roll into 2.1.(5?) >If you think this is a showstopper, then I have no problem removing >win32 from the list of supported platforms for Apache httpd -- in my >opinion, that community of users is too lazy to support their own >platform and we (as a project) cannot continue to rely on one person >to do all of the necessary work to keep it up to date. Little disagreement here but perhaps overreacting. If this is your wish propose it for a vote. >I see no reason to treat Win32 as any more significant than Irix, >at least not until we have a group of dedicated developers who care >enough about that platform to keep up with its never-ending baggage >of broken system libraries and compilers. Wholeheartedly agree. While I see enough traffic to know that many build on Win32 (for ssl, or module development, or whatever), but we know we don't see traffic to this list of other Win32 folks contributing. I can count on one hand how many Win32-centric contributors there are to httpd + apr, and on two hands how many have become proficient at 'stubbing in' new modules into the win32 build. I was pleasantly shocked and amazed in the cli-dev community to find a user who pointed out an issue, and then, proposed the fix! This is reassuring, perhaps the developers on the mod_aspdotnet side will find it productive to offer httpd code fixes back to our project when they discover httpd bugs. There are now about three not-Bill's contribute some diagnostics of the source code along with their problem reports. I hope several will stick around to become project members over the next few months. I just wonder if, as a % of users, are the Win32 users really that less contributing than, say linux users? Count the total number of folks running a linux server, divide by the number who have posted some code contribution to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Do the same for Win32. I'd suspect the difference isn't as great as you might imagine. >It terms of technical issues, APR has no business shipping an >implementation of iconv and I don't care if whatever is in that >directory can't compile -- if it isn't supported, then delete iconv >from APR and let people install it separately. I agree, and propose we remove pcre (from 2.0), regex (from 1.3) and expat (from apr). It doesn't mean we can't/won't provide the binary builds, built from the current stable release provided by those projects, when appropriate. Just as we do today for zlib (on win32, we ship the library built from zlib 1.1.4 src.) But these don't belong in our tree. Any disagreement? I would also propose we drop apr_xlate and mod_charset_lite if the only way to support this is GNU iconv, which incompatible with the ASL. However, as I mention I'm looking for some traction for a supported BSD-licensed version. FreeBSD has a new platform maintainer for that package, the newlib folks adopted it, so I'm hoping a community can be reformed around that code. Bill
