On 10/2/07, Rich Bowen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Oct 2, 2007, at 08:24, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > > Well, we could do: > > o Apache 1.3 and 2.0 deprecated > > > > As part of the support community, I'd like to have this defined pretty > clearly. > I presume it can't mean "no more bug fixes or security fixes." I suppose > it might mean "no more fixes after DD/MM/YYYY", but even then, I can't > imagine that we'll utterly disregard security problems when millions of > websites are running 1.3 > > So what does it actually mean? And why would anybody take it seriously? > > Those of us who do Apache httpd support have been saying, since roughly > 1999, you should get off of 1.3, but it has no teeth, and people have > their reasons, some of which are even well considered. > > So ... all that to say, if we're going to deprecate anything, we need to > define, very clearly, what exactly that means, and what people can expect it > to mean 2 years from now, 4 years, whatever. Because when there's a big > problem discovered, and we choose to ignore it, "I told you so" isn't really > going to look very good in the trade rags. > > -- > Patriotism is often an arbitrary veneration of real estate above > principles. > George Jean Nathan > > > > If we (well actually you) decide on deprecating 1.3 and 2.0 maybe a new section in the wiki to host all the update from x.x to 2.2 stuff to be placed?
-- ~Jorge
