Joshua Slive wrote:
Erik Abele wrote:
+1. great idea, but I think the mirror sites should be mentioned more
than only once. Perhaps an extra paragraph like the following would help:
If you look at the actual links, you'll see I'm pretty much forcing
people to download from the mirrors. I provide direct links only to the
mirrors. I do provide a link to the main site at the top, but I think
most people will take the direct links.
Oh sorry, I didn't realize that. I only saw the pointers in the text.
Well, then forget the extra paragraph, all this should be sufficient ;-)
Another Point are the official patches. IMO we should mention
http://www.apache.org/dist/httpd/patches/ together with a little note:
"When we have patches to a minor bug or two, or features which we
haven't yet included in a new release, we will put them in the patches
subdirectory so people can get access to it before we roll another
complete release."[1]
Perhaps a short note in the top section. But there is rarely anything
interesting in the patches directory.
That is, what I thought of... Isn't the above note short enough?
oh, btw the 2.0 paragraph praises 2.0.36 as the best available version
instead of 2.0.43. The headline, the text and the check-for-patches-link
are wrong.
Yep, thanks, I copied my text from a non-updated version of the
dist/README.html. I'll fix that.
Joshua.
erik
