Actually historically this is not quite right; I maintained a mod_auth_msql module in apache for quite a while, and kept a mod_auth_mysql module outside apache for licence reasons.
At some moment we deceided to drop both; as they where too obscure. I am seeing about 80-120 downloads a week for those modules; and it generates moderate mail; one or two a day. I think we have a general issue here with the information in modules.apache.org; even though anyone can put in the apache licence at the top of their code, it is not that contribet. I think in the long run we should have a larger page which has a long(er) list of such modules, all under the apache licence, all contributed, with a place in CVS and butraq; but possibly more maintained by mostly the original author than by the group. Dw On 3 Aug 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > [In order for any reply to be added to the PR database, you need] > [to include <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in the Cc line and make sure the] > [subject line starts with the report component and number, with ] > [or without any 'Re:' prefixes (such as "general/1098:" or ] > ["Re: general/1098:"). If the subject doesn't match this ] > [pattern, your message will be misfiled and ignored. The ] > ["apbugs" address is not added to the Cc line of messages from ] > [the database automatically because of the potential for mail ] > [loops. If you do not include this Cc, your reply may be ig- ] > [nored unless you are responding to an explicit request from a ] > [developer. Reply only with text; DO NOT SEND ATTACHMENTS! ] > > > Synopsis: Addition of the mod_auth_mysql module > > State-Changed-From-To: open-closed > State-Changed-By: coar > State-Changed-When: Tue Aug 3 15:03:54 PDT 1999 > State-Changed-Why: > > The basic rule is that a module is only a candidate for > inclusion in the base package if someone known and > participating on the Apache developer mailing list > volunteers to maintain it. There are exceptions to > this, of course, but we don't want to include items > that none of the participants are willing to support. > There's also the issue of ownership and licence. If > Zeev wants to participate and support it, and the > licence isn't incompatible, there a pretty good chance > this could be done. > > >
