On 12/23/2016 03:52 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > Personally, I don't think that backporting stuff to > 2.4 prevents or disallows development on 2.6/3.0. In > fact, I think it helps. We can easily do both... > after all, we are still "working" on 2.2. > > As I have also stated, my personal belief is that > 2.4 is finally reaching some traction, and if we > "turn off" development/enhancement of 2.4, we will > stop the uptake of 2.4 in its track. We need to keep > 2.4 viable and worthwhile we, at the same time, work > on 2.6/3.0. I think we all understand that getting > 2.6/3.0 out will not be a quick and/or painless > action.
From my perspective, watching Nginx gain traction through superior marketing, and channeling Dilbert's Pointy Haired Boss in assuming that everything which I have never done must be simple, I, for one, would like to see us release a 2.6, and more generally, to release a 2.x every 2 years, or less, rather than every 4 years, or more. My opinion on this, I would emphasize, is 100% marketing, and 0% technical. I realize we "don't do" marketing, but if we want to still ve having the fun of doing this in another 20 years, it may be necessary to get our name out there a little more frequently in terms of doing new things. We are frankly not great at telling the world about the cool new things we're doing. -- Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com - @rbowen http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
