On Nov 15, 2007, at 4:22 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
Now that the TR of APR / APR-UTIL is in progress (Thanks Other Bill)
httpd 2.2.7 seems to come in sight. There are about 10 backport
proposals in the STATUS file that are only missing one vote. So
come on it is
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
Now that the TR of APR / APR-UTIL is in progress (Thanks Other Bill)
httpd 2.2.7 seems to come in sight. There are about 10 backport
proposals in the STATUS file that are only missing one vote. So
come on it is voting and review time guys :-)).
There is one backport
On 9/28/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So with Jorge's and help from a few others, 2.2.6 builds quite nicely at
the command line. To make the transition to the GUI requires some other
steps, and I'm hoping these are simpler with 2.2.7 if I have a whole
weekend to work them
On 9/28/07, *William A. Rowe, Jr.* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So with Jorge's and help from a few others, 2.2.6 builds quite nicely at
the command line. To make the transition to the GUI requires some other
steps, and I'm hoping these are simpler with
On 9/28/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/28/07, *William A. Rowe, Jr.* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So with Jorge's and help from a few others, 2.2.6 builds quite
nicely at
the command line. To make the transition to the GUI requires
2007/9/27, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
[...] Here at [EMAIL PROTECTED] we are trying to create a better server, and
having
fun in the process. As long as we don't splinter the effort of improving
httpd server or make more work for the project members, we'll all have fun
at it.
Regarding the threatening mail from Roy T. Fielding, :
There would not be a windows version of Apache without Bill's efforts
to keep it alive, and there won't be one in the future if windows
developers refuse to participate in the development mailing lists
HERE.
Really ? Do you mean that
On 27.09.2007, at 10:05, François wrote:
2007/9/27, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
[...] Here at [EMAIL PROTECTED] we are trying to create a better server,
and having
fun in the process. As long as we don't splinter the effort of
improving
httpd server or make more work for the
2007/9/27, Rich Bowen [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Um ... No, that's not at all what's being said. Quite apart from the
history of the founding of that company ... but that's utterly irrelevant
here. Companies aren't participants in Apache projects. Individuals are.
IMHO, this kind of subtleties
Very well put Rich.
Ed Herring
AMR2 BaR Administrator
512-314-1133
Cell Phone 512-917-8480
From: Rich Bowen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 8:39 AM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: 2.2.7
Again, Steffens contributions would be very welcomed *here* if this
whole AL thing were just not that misleading - hey, with some effort
he could e.g. help out constructively by building these binaries in a
transparent and documented way *here* and we could even distribute
them from
On 09/27/2007 05:04 PM, François wrote:
2007/9/27, Rich Bowen [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Um ... No, that's not at all what's being said. Quite apart from the
history of the founding of that company ... but that's utterly irrelevant
here. Companies aren't participants in Apache projects.
On Sep 27, 2007, at 11:04 AM, François wrote:
2007/9/27, Rich Bowen [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Furthermore, Apache for Windows will only continue to exist if
there is a steady flow of these volunteers. This (dev@) is the
forum in which they operate. This, also, is not a threat, but a
plain
On Sep 27, 2007 9:22 AM, Jorge Schrauwen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I could provide x64 binaries if there is interest in them. I usually push
them out to my site within a week of the source release.
I'm not 100% sure my method of creating them is the same as the ASF's but I
can change my way if
My method is documentated here:
http://www.blackdot.be/?inc=apache/knowledge/tutorials/x64
It is on my wiki todo list but school is keeping me busy + the weekends are
going to some stuff that is earning me money.
My method has evolved slightly but not very much just minor tweaks to make
things
Erik Abele wrote:
Sure, we all have to pay our bills but you're overlooking a difference:
Nick just replied to an inquiry offering his (and others services); he
doesn't advertise any revenue-generating site after every release etc.
etc... ;-0
Nick's comment didn't even mention he does this
Just for reference, Jorge's been instrumental in providing feedback that
has made it easier (not trivial, yet) to build for x64 on Windows. There's
actually a build log sitting off in http://people.apache.org/~wrowe/ if
anyone is interested in how noisy the 64 bit builds still are on win32,
we
On 27.09.2007, at 17:04, François wrote:
2007/9/27, Erik Abele [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Again, Steffens contributions would be very welcomed *here* if this
whole AL thing were just not that misleading - hey, with some effort
he could e.g. help out constructively by building these binaries
in a
On 28.09.2007, at 01:28, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Erik Abele wrote:
Sure, we all have to pay our bills but you're overlooking a
difference:
Nick just replied to an inquiry offering his (and others
services); he
doesn't advertise any revenue-generating site after every release
etc.
On 09/26/2007 03:11 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
I'd like for us to consider a release of 2.2.7 in October
to address the Windows file handle issues as well
some other fixes that would be useful to get out quickly...
+1 as soon as the Windows file handle issues are fixed in
APR and probably in
On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 18:15:06 +0200
Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am not quite sure if the proxy patches Nick is currently
working on will fit into this timescale. Depending on their importance
we might need to have a look on the timescale again.
Of course it puts pressure on the
Jim Jagielski wrote:
I'd like for us to consider a release of 2.2.7 in October
to address the Windows file handle issues as well
some other fixes that would be useful to get out quickly...
How about 2 :)
I expect to have Windows fixes ready to backport next week after
the perlfolk confirm my
On Sep 26, 2007, at 12:50 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
I'd like for us to consider a release of 2.2.7 in October
to address the Windows file handle issues as well
some other fixes that would be useful to get out quickly...
How about 2 :)
I expect to have Windows
- Original Message -
From: William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Sent: Wednesday, 26 September, 2007 18:50
Subject: Re: 2.2.7
Jim Jagielski wrote:
I'd like for us to consider a release of 2.2.7 in October
to address the Windows file handle issues as well
some
September, 2007 21:05
Subject: Re: 2.2.7
There is the ASF statement/promise:
Modules compiled for Apache 2.2 should continue to work for all 2.2.x
releases.
So I expect that modules have *not* to be new compiled. It is quite
confusing for our users en authors have to maintain in most
cases up
Steffen wrote:
There is the ASF statement/promise:
Modules compiled for Apache 2.2 should continue to work for all 2.2.x
releases.
***SHOULD*** is the operative word. There are always exceptions.
I have a half dozen examples where I've abused the microsoft foundation
classes in my code
Steffen wrote:
I want to give attention to
http://bahumbug.wordpress.com/2007/09/07/apache-226/
May be agood time to reconsider the depency for example with APR.
Actually, I'm a fan of that idea - but not in the httpd 2.2.x cycle.
It would be great to see 2.4.0 (3.0.0?) presume the latest
PROTECTED]
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Sent: Wednesday, 26 September, 2007 21:42
Subject: Re: 2.2.7
Steffen wrote:
There is the ASF statement/promise:
Modules compiled for Apache 2.2 should continue to work for all 2.2.x
releases.
***SHOULD*** is the operative word. There are always exceptions.
I
On Sep 26, 2007, at 1:53 PM, Steffen wrote:
There we go again Bill with your phrase above. I do not appreciate
that you communcate like this in Public, please stop it. More and
more I got the impression that you do not want AL in the scene,
fine, say it to me personal. You are oh so happy
Roy really said everything necessary, I hesitated to even respond to you.
But I'll offer this so that my frustration is perfectly clear and we (you
and I, and for other devs in relation to other service providers as well)
can coexist peacefully.
Steffen wrote:
Tom's done a great job of
30 matches
Mail list logo
