Aaron Bannert wrote:
>On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 10:44:46AM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote:
>
>
>>I still believe that everything that is currently in ROADMAP can and
>>should be implemented in 2.0.
>>
I agree.
>And my point is we won't know until there is a patch that solves
>one of the roadmap problems. Only then will we be able to decide.
>
The problem I have with the roadmap is that it's mostly a list
of implementation changes. What it should be is a list of product
features: things that are meaningful to a customer of Apache (whether
that customer is an end-user or a third-party developer), not just
meaningful to those of us who work on the httpd code.
From my perspective, the event that should cause us to branch for
a 2.1 or 3.0 release isn't "this code change is too drastic for 2.0"
but rather: "this new feature that's useful to customers is impossible
to build or maintain on top of the 2.0 framework." And hopefully it
will be a while before we get to that point: 2.0's design allows us
to make a *lot* of changes without requiring a rearchitecture of the
core server.
I'd really like to see a roadmap that says something like:
Remaining 2.0 maintenance releases:
- Incremental performance improvements
- Bug fixes
- New modules and MPMs as needed
2.1:
- "Sandbox" processes in which to run untrusted plug-in code safely
- Further refactoring of the core daemon to make it easier
to support non-HTTP protocols
3.0:
- New architecture for massive scalability
--Brian
