Re: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-05 Thread alex
On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 06:59:38PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can I ask a stupid question? What have we actually broken since Apache 2.0 went GA? Binary compatibility? How many functions? How many of those were APR and not Apache? Sure, both source and binary compatibility

Re: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-04 Thread Henning Brauer
On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 03:34:51PM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: [ ] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.0. [X] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.1.

RE: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-04 Thread Sander Striker
From: Henning Brauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 04 September 2002 12:43 On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 03:34:51PM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: [ ] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.0. [X] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.1. Could you please motivate this? We are interested in seeing why it should go

Re: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-04 Thread Henning Brauer
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 12:57:05PM +0200, Sander Striker wrote: From: Henning Brauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 04 September 2002 12:43 On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 03:34:51PM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: [ ] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.0. [X] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.1. Could

Re: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-04 Thread Mads Toftum
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 01:07:38PM +0200, Henning Brauer wrote: It's easy enough to create a 2.1 branch in CVS and developing the new auth stuff there until it's stable. then syncing changes done in the 2.0 stuff in and releasing 2.1 seems fair to me, opposed to destabilizing the whole 2.0

Re: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-04 Thread Jeff Trawick
Justin Erenkrantz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [X] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.0. [ ] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.1. -- Jeff Trawick | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Born in Roswell... married an alien...

Re: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-04 Thread Henning Brauer
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 01:24:38PM +0200, Mads Toftum wrote: On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 01:07:38PM +0200, Henning Brauer wrote: It's easy enough to create a 2.1 branch in CVS and developing the new auth stuff there until it's stable. then syncing changes done in the 2.0 stuff in and releasing

RE: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-04 Thread Sander Striker
From: Justin Erenkrantz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 04 September 2002 00:35 Please vote: [X] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.0. [ ] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.1. Please realize that I don't think it's possible to maintain backwards compatibility due to the relevant Authoritative

Re: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-04 Thread Ian Holsman
Jeff Trawick wrote: Justin Erenkrantz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [X] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.0. [ ] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.1. same with me.

[VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-03 Thread Justin Erenkrantz
Please vote: [ ] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.0. [ ] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.1. Please realize that I don't think it's possible to maintain backwards compatibility due to the relevant Authoritative directives. So, a vote for 2.0 means it is okay to break backwards compatibility. Everyone is

Re: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-03 Thread rbb
On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: Please vote: [X] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.0. [ ] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.1. Ryan

Re: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-03 Thread Brian Pane
Justin Erenkrantz wrote: Please vote: [X] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.0. [ ] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.1.

Re: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-03 Thread Chris Taylor
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [ ] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.0. [X] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.1. My view is that it's important to keep 2.0 stable to attract new users, and breaking things all the time won't help :) Chris Taylor - The guy with the PS2 WebServer Email: [EMAIL

Re: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-03 Thread David Shane Holden
[ ] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.0. [x] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.1. Shane

Re: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-03 Thread rbb
On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Chris Taylor wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [ ] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.0. [X] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.1. My view is that it's important to keep 2.0 stable to attract new users, and breaking things all the time won't help :) Can I ask a

Re: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-03 Thread gs-apache-dev
Please vote: [X] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.0. [ ] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.1. Adoption of Apache 2 so far has been low enough that Apache 2 may still be considered to be in the early adopter phase. Breaking compatibility is to be avoided when possible, but is allowable when necessary,

Re: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-03 Thread Rasmus Lerdorf
On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Chris Taylor wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [ ] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.0. [X] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.1. My view is that it's important to keep 2.0 stable to attract new users, and breaking things all the time won't help :) Can

Re: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-03 Thread Jim Jagielski
Please vote: [X] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.0. [ ] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.1. Lesser of 2 evils, IMO. Breaking backwards compatibility for the 1.3 community and the early 2.0 adopters is painful, but I think spreading resources towards a 2.1 tree is even more dangerous and painful. --

Re: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-03 Thread rbb
On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Chris Taylor wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [ ] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.0. [X] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.1. My view is that it's important to keep 2.0 stable to attract new users,

Re: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-03 Thread Brian Pane
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Chris Taylor wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [ ] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.0. [X] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.1. My view is that it's important to keep 2.0 stable to attract new users, and breaking things all the

Re: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-03 Thread Rasmus Lerdorf
On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Chris Taylor wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [ ] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.0. [X] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.1. My view is that it's important to keep 2.0 stable to attract new

Re: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-03 Thread David Reid
[X] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.0. [ ] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.1. Why are we suddenly having so many damned votes...

Re: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-03 Thread rbb
On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Chris Taylor wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [ ] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.0. [X] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.1. My view is

Re: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-03 Thread Brad Nicholes
[X] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.0. [ ] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.1. Brad Brad Nicholes Senior Software Engineer Novell, Inc., the leading provider of Net business solutions http://www.novell.com

Re: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-03 Thread Aaron Bannert
On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 03:34:51PM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: Please vote: [ ] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.0. [X] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.1. Please realize that I don't think it's possible to maintain backwards compatibility due to the relevant Authoritative directives. So, a vote

Re: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-03 Thread Greg Stein
On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 03:34:51PM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: Please vote: [X] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.0. [ ] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.1. -- Please realize that I don't think it's possible to maintain backwards compatibility due to the relevant Authoritative

Re: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-03 Thread Joshua Slive
On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: Please realize that I don't think it's possible to maintain backwards compatibility due to the relevant Authoritative directives. So, a vote for 2.0 means it is okay to break backwards compatibility. Just as a crazy idea: Since you are retaining

Re: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-03 Thread Justin Erenkrantz
On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 04:36:58PM -0700, Joshua Slive wrote: Just as a crazy idea: Since you are retaining all the old APIs, shouldn't it be possible to distribute the current modules as mod_auth_compat and mod_auth_dbm_compat that users could activate to get all the old directives? Eek.

Re: [VOTE] Location of aaa rewrite

2002-09-03 Thread Paul J. Reder
Please vote: [X] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.0. [ ] Check in aaa rewrite to 2.1. Jim Jagielski wrote: Lesser of 2 evils, IMO. Breaking backwards compatibility for the 1.3 community and the early 2.0 adopters is painful, but I think spreading resources towards a 2.1 tree is even more