Jeff Stuart wrote: > On Tue, 2002-02-26 at 11:26, Dale Ghent wrote: > >>On Tue, 26 Feb 2002, Ryan Bloom wrote: >> >>| If you read the statement in context, it shouldn't be alarming. It was >>| in response to a statement that we shouldn't be re-writing any code, >>| because it destabilizes the current code. I patently disagree with that >>| statement. >>| >>| I also disagree that just tweaking common code should be a problem. >>| Perhaps most importantly though, I don't think the changes for perchild >>| will extend beyond the MPM. >> >>I just want to interject my 2pf here... >> >>Both of you are right to some degree, I feel. >> >>but my questions are: >> >> *) When will we be CLEARLY in beta or even rc mode? I don't think >> it's clear what the status of the tree is now; to me, let >> alone all of the other Joe Admins out there that are really >> interested in Apache 2.0, but are confused by the amount of >> time being taken to release it. Is ap 2.0.32 REALLY 2.0, or is >> it beta? Will 2.1 be what has been touted as Apache 2.0? >> >> *) When will the the tree be strictly frozen with the exception >> for bug fixes? We keep adding stuff, changing stuff... breaking >> other things here and there unintentionally in the process... >> it doesnt seem like some tangible goal is being worked towards. >> I mean, there was an API change to APR just last week. We are >> on to our umpteenth locking mechanism. When will everyone >> settle down and work with what we have? >> >>There's no roadmap; There's no release date of any sort for the tree, be >>it alpha, beta, delta, zulu, red, yellow, or final. No code regression >>testing. >>
I just thought I'd like to add my 2c I beleve that Apache 2.0 is stable enough to run a production server on. and has been for a while. YOU have to decide whether 2.0 is stable enough for YOUR website. if the apache group turned around tomorrom and announced that 2.0 is released it would make NO DIFFERENCE. as after all it is just a line in the sand. and you still need to do your own testing in your environment to make sure it works for you. The only complaint I have is that the API is still open, but if you notice the amount of change in the API's are very minor since .28 that I noticed. If you want to help. start running the server in your production configuration NOW (not on your production box). run a simple load through it, test it with the modules you use every day. and email the results. as for creaping featurism.. well.. look around. every 'patchset' that solaris releases has new features. these are fine, the problem is if they break how the external world uses the modules, server, and from the changes I've seen lately going through this isn't happening. so.. go grab .32 and install it on a dev/staging machine run your regression tests, benchmarks, and give the group feedback. this could be as simple as '.32 runs great for me..' or '.32 breaks XXx & YYY' ..Ian >>I kind of get the feeling that someone will wake up one morning and say >>"Hey, let's release 2.0!" and I fear that. Then the scramble To Get Stuff >>In ensues. >> >>/dale >> > > I must say AMEN to this and to Dale's previous email! I've been off the > list for a good 6 months or so I think it was (IE around the time of > 2.0.28 I think it was). And I come back and see still NO progress > towards a viable beta/release of 2.0. > > Now, I'm going to say something that I KNOW will get the response of > "Well, this is a free product" or "We have no responsibility to those > folks." I'll address these two comments after I have my say. > > There is an ALARMING lack of either understanding or respect towards > those people/companies that are DEPENDING on Apache and are DESPERATELY > attempting to hold the fort while waiting for Apache 2.0. I find Ryan's > statement in context AND OUT VERY ALARMING. IE when one should be > moving towards a releasable project you're still talking about making > MAJOR changes to the code base. WHETHER it's just to a specific MPM or > not.. we ALL KNOW that a code change that large will have a detrimental > affect on the overall code stability (at least until THOSE bugs are > fixed). I'm not saying that people can't work on something or that we > shouldn't fix bugs just that the focus of the development community in > my eyes NEEDS to change from adding features to fixing the bugs that > remain as best we can and then getting Apache 2.0 OUT THE DOOR. > > Now, in response to the above two comments (and their derivatives), yes, > Apache is free. So is Linux, so is Mysql, so is PHP, so is Perl. > However, all of the above products (yes, I do use the term PRODUCT > specifically here) focus the development team towards RELEASING a > tangible product. Apache 2.0 has had creeping featurisims for longer > than I care to even think. :( There is no tangible list that anyone can > go and look at and say "OK... all of this stuff is done and works. > Let's get into release mode." And we see things like Dale mentions > above. API changes at such a LATE date in the game or Ryan proposing a > MAJOR code change to a large part of the code (Ryan, if you did not, > then my apologies on naming you. IE the per-child MPM stuff). > > As far as having no responsibility to the people/companies that USE > Apache, I put forth this argument. When a company bases it's business > or a person bases their career on a program, in MY OPINION, there then > springs into a being an implied responsibility on the development team > to support the product and keep it alive. IE they have put THEIR MONEY > behind this product. When a web hosting company says "I use Apache.", > that means that they are backing Apache with THEIR MONEY. No, they did > NOT pay the ASF to RENT a license of Apache but they are STILL spending > money on Apache. > > Apache 2.0 should have been out a year ago... You seem to be thinking in > real world time. We are NOT in real world time here... This is INTERNET > TIME. THINGS CHANGE QUICKLY! In 6 months, the landscape of the net > will be very different; and in another 6 months, it will change again. > This is NET time. 3 years of development is like 30 years of REAL > TIME. > > I guess in closing, as a "lowly" person who just depends on apache for > his livelihood and career path please release Apache 2.0 SOON. There > are things that I would LOVE to be able to do that right now, I can't > since Apache 2.0 is not out and therefore, things like mod_perl are not > ported to it, etc. Final disclaimer: Of course, this is all in my > opinion. > > Jeff Stuart > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
