> On May 2, 2018, at 10:45 AM, Micha Lenk <mi...@lenk.info> wrote: > > Hi Graham, > > On 05/01/2018 04:33 PM, Graham Leggett wrote: >> What has been missing is input from the major distributors of our >> software (Fedora, Ubuntu, Redhat, Debian, Apple, Windows, Linux from >> Scratch, etc), who I believe are probably going “httpd is a mature >> project, we have nothing to worry about”. I would recommend against >> making changes to our approach without soliciting the views of these >> people and making sure they’re all catered for. > Why would you make a proposed change dependent on the (almost necessarily > contradicting) views of external entities? Is the feedback from the major > distributors through existing channels really so bad that the httpd project > can't get to an opinion of what it would like to accomplish on its own? What > exactly are you afraid of? >
Due to the modular aspect of httpd, we are lucky to have an extremely large, vibrant and diverse eco-system of module authors. Some are companies that provide functionality via binary modules, others are single-author GitHub authors. A change on versioning and what versioning means and guarantees related to versioning affects this extremely large community. There is also the ISV and commercial *providers* of httpd to be considered as well, and how these changes would affect them. With all that in mind, you can't just "willy-nilly" decide to change things without knowledge of how such changes will affect the eco- system as well as without a really solid rationale for said change. I don't consider "I can point out a handful of projects that do it different than httpd" as a solid rationale.
