On Sun, 2 Sep 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Correct... and for a while the reason was because everyone thought the
> module was using ZLIB and there has been a long standing aversion to
> including ANY version of GNU ZLIB ( or any other GNU stuff ) into the
> Apache tree. We have personal emails from your board members stating
> that to be the case. If that aversion has evaporated then there is a TON of
> GNU based stuff that is now 'eligible' for inclusion in the core
> distribution, right?

What Brian said.  Are we talking about the same zlib?  The one I know
about is the one Brian linked to, which is NOT GPL and hence is eligible.
No GPL code is eligible due to the "viral" effect of the GPL on code that
uses it.

> We have said any number of times that even the ORIGINAL version of mod_gzip
> was coded/tested against the ORIGINAL (alpha) release of Apache 2.0.

I know that.  But that was a long, long time ago.  And filters and bucket
brigades have changed a lot since then.  I haven't seen the lastest
version is all I was saying.  I'd really like to.  Please consider sending
me a copy privately so that I can review it.  I'm just interested in a
side-by-side comparison (if there even IS a comparison, which is also
something I'd like to see for myself).

> The moment we are sure that the actual Apache Web Server you are trying to
> use to compress responses is stable and actually able to do the IETF
> Content-encoding without screwing up the responses we will release the code.
> We would prefer GA but decided that, itself, is so far off that we will
> settle for at least 1 known good BETA.

We have a beta out there.  It's 2.0.16.  That said, it's nowhere near as
good as 2.0.26 will be when it's released (assuming no unforseen
catastrophies happen), and many of us tend to just get irritated when
people ask questions about why something doesn't work in 2.0.16.  Beats
the hell out of me... that was ages ago code-wise.  It's probably either
fixed or broken in a different way by now.  :-)  But it's also true that
we're lightyears closer to a stable release now than ever before.

--Cliff


--------------------------------------------------------------
   Cliff Woolley
   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Charlottesville, VA


Reply via email to