On 02.08.2013 14:41, Daniel Gruno wrote: > Hi dev@, > Though this is mainly a question for docs@, I thought I'd drop this > email into the dev@ list instead, since this is where I think > objections, if there are any, will arise. > > Today, on various Internet channels, I have had to do my very best to > defend the use of mod_lua, ranging from people asking if it's safe to > use to people claiming that it should never be used in a production > environment. Why? because of one word in particular: Experimental. > > In our documentation, we write the following: > ---- > mod_lua is still in experimental state. Until it is declared stable, > usage and behavior may change at any time, even between stable releases > of the 2.4.x series. Be sure to check the CHANGES file before upgrading. > ---- > > To a committer/programmer, this may seem totally sane, but to a user of > httpd - and I sincerely hope that users are our aim in the documentaion > - this wording screams "BACK OFF, this may explode at any given time!". > As a "long time" developer and user of httpd/mod_lua for both personal > and professional sites/manoeuvres/jobs, I find it sad that I have to > defend a module in otherwise perfect working condition with no > discernible faults at all, simply because of a wording that scares off > regular users of httpd. So I'd really like to change the wording into > something less scary, so users can both know that it's still in a > development phase, but it won't blow up your computer or spread germs if > you use it on a production server. > > I'd like to change the note to something along these lines: > ---- > mod_lua is in a state of continuous development. Usage > and behavior is subject to change at any time, even between stable > releases of the 2.4.x series. Be sure to check the CHANGES file before > upgrading > ---- > > From a programming point of view, I can understand if there are > reservations towards this change, but I ask you to look at it from a > user point of view, and I hope you'll welcome this proposal for change.
What about the U-word Unstable? Some might associate with unstable that it is not robust, so again the potential for misinterpretation, but from a technical point of view the term "unstable" correctly describes the above potential for incompatible changes. Regards, Rainer
