On 2015-05-27 17:34, William A Rowe Jr 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.
Not directly related to the EoL discussion, but some additional notices why a change to 2.4 takes some time. There where are some deal breakers for users to keep 2.2 running, most of them are fixed meanwhile. E.g. - mod_perl was for a long time not usable with 2.4, as a workaround most porters / packagers are shaping mod_perl for 2.4 directly from mod_perl trunk, now we see a first 2.0.9-rc1. - for long time there was no working mod_php module for 2.4, and changing to php-fpm was not for everyone a solution. - a bunch of third party modules are written for 2.0.x and do not build against 2.4, in some cases simply fixing s/r->useragent_ip/r->connection->remote_ip/ does the trick to make users happy I remember endless discussions removing apache 1.3 from the ports tree even one year after the 1.3 EoL, and the complain was not only from end users.
