Garrett D'Amore wrote: > Petr Sumbera wrote: >> Garrett D'Amore wrote:
>>> I think personally, I'd rather go through just a single EOF process >>> than go through two of them. >> >> There used to be some vendor specific Apache 1.3 modules (e.g. from >> Oracle, IBM). I'm not sure whether all these have their equivalent for >> Apache 2.2 now. So with all respect to Gnome I wouldn't compare it here. >> >> This case is here so we can remove Apache JServ as soon as possible >> since there is clear migration path. While Apache 1.3 removal would >> require usual time off. > > Gosh, I'd hope that vendors would have made version 2.x modules > available. Apache 2.0 was released quite some time ago... back in > 2002. This is no longer cutting edge technology. We have now in Nevada just Apache 2.2 (not 2.0). Note also that modules are not binary compatible between version 2.0 and 2.2. > (Apache 1.3 was released back in 1998.) > > That said, I'm happy to +1 this case if an EOF of Apache 1.3 is not > deemed practical at this time. I do think the project team should at > least undertake the effort to Obsolete Apache 1.3 as soon as possible > though, so we can start the timer for its actual removal. > > (Actually, getting a notification in the the next S10 update would allow > removal in the next full release, assuming you get buy in from the > various committees that would have to approve it. It seems like that > approval would be fairly straight-forward to get, unless there are known > consumers that we have to support and which can't migrate to Apache 2.0 > or Apache 2.2.) I'm ok with this. My manager has this on his to do list now for some time. Petr
