Bill Stoddard wrote:
> Third, we have not decided the best way to
> distribute the proxy. It has been discussed at length but I don;t recall a
> final decision (I really have no opinions on whether the proxy is included
> in the httpd-2.0 tree or not). It is not a big deal to roll the proxy
> tarball and make it available to work with 2.0.18. We can include it next
> time around. Finally, unless I am mistaken, Chuck believes there are still
> showstopper problems with the proxy and it is not a beta candidate (the
> Akamai problems).
The Akamai problems are solved for me, but not for Chuck - the only way
to know for sure what is going on is to get proxy out there and get a
third opinion.
When are we going to release a decision on mod_proxy?
Options so far are:
1) Integrate it back into httpd. It's simple, it works, and it's got a
whole bunch of +1's.
2) Proxy people place latest stable version in httpd-proxy/stable.
Apache RM pulls in latest version and places it in
httpd-2.0/modules/proxy during the roll process.
Let's get a final decision on this - 1) or 2)?
Regards,
Graham
--
-----------------------------------------
[EMAIL PROTECTED] "There's a moon
over Bourbon Street
tonight..."
S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
