On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 13:43:17 -0600, Graham Leggett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Apart from backhand, > are there > in the experience of the people on this list any other significant apps > out there that are keeping people from deploying httpd v2.x? The only complaint about functional regression I've heard from our user base in quite a while is disk caching proxy. (needs stable mod_disk_cache, where stable means something more than "we just addressed a bunch of known issues, please go put it in production and let us know how many times your pager goes off ;)" ) For the users I work with, it is rare that they depend on a third-party module which doesn't already support 2.0, and in fact there are a number of common situations where 2.0 is a better solution: "If you were using &server; 2.0, this issue wouldn't occur." (e.g., various resources both in core server and in key modules which are utilized much more efficiently with threaded server) "If you were using &server; 2.0, we could work around this problem as follows" (e.g., implement small module utilizing 2.0 API features to work-around limitation of some other part of the system) "With &server; 2.0, feature A and feature B are not mutually exclusive." But it takes multiple occurrences of these situations over time before user will switch since the user needs to spend bulk of their time worrying about their applications instead of messing with the web server. So users with less interesting environments (problem situations are rare) remain on 1.3 much longer, while users with more interesting environments are predominantly on 2.0.
