My point is that if we EOL 2.2 (with some definition of "EOL")
then people on 2.2 (or earlier) will have some *real* incentive
to move off of 2.2 towards 2.4 (or later)...
Basically, we need something to "kick" people off 2.2
and get them to 2.4. By stating that 2.2 will ONLY get
security related fixes and no new features or improvements,
and that 2.2 will be EOL by 201X, that will be encouragement.
That, of course, assumes that we "care" one way or another
about moving people to a more up-to-date and performant
httpd, as well as whatever the future holds for httpd.
FWIW: It was this month's PMC status report which kind of
spurred this email.
> On May 27, 2015, at 11:34 AM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 7:54 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote:
> Anyone else think it's time to EOL 2.2 and focus
> on 2.4 and the next gen?
>
> Nope, we'll let the internet speak for itself -
>
> http://w3techs.com/technologies/history_details/ws-apache/2
>
> We are nowhere near close enough to the inflection point of that graph to
> justify starting the 12 month EOL clock (which has been our traditional
> countdown, same as the Tomcat project).
>
> My thoughts are that http/2
> and mod_h2 will drive the trunk design efforts and so
>
> That sounds about right. I'm personally interested in 3.0 - refactoring on
> trunk to clean up the evolution of httpd since 2.0.36. That was when we
> froze MMN majors, so many many bits are now shoehorned into the server in
> very awkward manners. This will make backports to 2.4 more complex, however.
>
> it would be nice to focus energy on 2.4 and later...
>
> Focus your energy on anything you like.
>
