My apologies for the Disclaimer at the bottom. I had forgotten that it
was appended to all outgoing email. I've asked that it be not appended to
dev-http email address, so this is basically my test to see if that work
was done correctly.
2 questions to start:
- where does one find the approved
On 3/12/2013 11:10 AM, Dwayne Miller wrote:
My apologies for the Disclaimer at the bottom. I had forgotten that it
was appended to all outgoing email. I've asked that it be not appended to
dev-http email address, so this is basically my test to see if that work
was done correctly.
2 questions
I'm rejoining this list after several years of inactivity. I'm joining
primarily in regards to this thread.
I would like to help if possible.
I'm also curious as to the reason for the absence of the MSI build for the two
most recent releases? Is this a volunteer issue? Is it a technology
On Mon, 11 Mar 2013 14:41:48 +
Dwayne Miller dwayne.mil...@nc4.us wrote:
I'm rejoining this list after several years of inactivity. I'm
joining primarily in regards to this thread.
I would like to help if possible.
We are starting from scratch with 2.4.x. Several key reasons;
- Long
- Original Message -
On 11/28/2012 1:26 AM, Igor Galić wrote:
I believe there's a couple of things we all sort of agree on:
* current state is not welcomed by users and early adopters
I'm not sure what you mean by current state. Regardless, early
adopters
know no better.
* we
Has anyone consider that in the meanwhile we update our
website to officially endorse ApacheLounge?
-0.9; Seems like a lot of baggage to carry, and I think we should have
our own contributed builds.
On 11/29/2012 7:42 AM, Igor Galić wrote:
Has anyone consider that in the meanwhile we update our
website to officially endorse ApacheLounge?
Not endorse any, just list the possibilities, there are a few.
+1
On Nov 29, 2012 2:34 PM, Gregg Smith g...@gknw.net wrote:
On 11/29/2012 7:42 AM, Igor Galić wrote:
Has anyone consider that in the meanwhile we update our
website to officially endorse ApacheLounge?
Not endorse any, just list the possibilities, there are a few.
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Gregg Smith g...@gknw.net wrote:
On 11/29/2012 7:42 AM, Igor Galić wrote:
Has anyone consider that in the meanwhile we update our
website to officially endorse ApacheLounge?
Not endorse any, just list the possibilities, there are a few.
I definitely feel
Does you guys agree with the layout that Apache Lounge uses?
-Will
- Original Message -
From: Arturo 'Buanzo' Busleiman
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 12:35 PM
Subject: Re: Volunteers to drive an MSI build
+1
On Nov 29, 2012 2:34 PM, Gregg
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Will william.leon...@lxcenter.org wrote:
Does you guys agree with the layout that Apache Lounge uses?
I wouldn't interpret the proposal that way.
I would just like to know your thoughts on the layout that they use with the
zip.
-Will
- Original Message -
From: Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 2:10 PM
Subject: Re: Volunteers to drive an MSI build
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012
- Original Message -
the only point to resolve is that Gregg cant do the releases self
but needs
a PMC for signing and putting up the artifacts - but I'm willing to
assist
with that once we get some agreement to put his stuff up
Sorry for not commenting earlier . I'm +0.9
On Nov 28, 2012, at 4:26 AM, Igor Galić i.ga...@brainsware.org wrote:
* we (the ASF) should provide an official Windows Build
Why?
-Original Message-
From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com]
Sent: Mittwoch, 28. November 2012 13:22
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: Volunteers to drive an MSI build
On Nov 28, 2012, at 4:26 AM, Igor Galić i.ga...@brainsware.org wrote:
* we (the ASF) should
- Original Message -
-Original Message-
From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com]
Sent: Mittwoch, 28. November 2012 13:22
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: Volunteers to drive an MSI build
On Nov 28, 2012, at 4:26 AM, Igor Galić i.ga
:22 PM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: Volunteers to drive an MSI build
On Nov 28, 2012, at 4:26 AM, Igor Galić i.ga...@brainsware.org wrote:
* we (the ASF) should provide an official Windows Build
Why?
On Wednesday 28 November 2012 15:01:15 Igor Galić wrote:
- Original Message -
-Original Message-
From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com]
Sent: Mittwoch, 28. November 2012 13:22
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: Volunteers to drive an MSI build
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 10:35 AM, André Malo n...@perlig.de wrote:
You know that, and I know that. Jst as our Windows users know
they have no use for source code.
The discussion is moot. The ASF will not provide binary software.
Is that a new policy? ASF has provided (i.e. made available
On Wednesday 28 November 2012 17:02:30 Yehuda Katz wrote:
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 10:35 AM, André Malo n...@perlig.de wrote:
You know that, and I know that. Jst as our Windows users know
they have no use for source code.
The discussion is moot. The ASF will not provide binary software.
On 11/28/2012 1:26 AM, Igor Galić wrote:
I believe there's a couple of things we all sort of agree on:
* current state is not welcomed by users and early adopters
I'm not sure what you mean by current state. Regardless, early adopters
know no better.
* we (the ASF) should provide an official
On 11/28/2012 8:10 AM, André Malo wrote:
On Wednesday 28 November 2012 17:02:30 Yehuda Katz wrote:
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 10:35 AM, André Malon...@perlig.de wrote:
You know that, and I know that. Jst as our Windows users know
they have no use for source code.
The discussion is moot. The ASF
* Gregg Smith wrote:
On 11/28/2012 8:10 AM, André Malo wrote:
Some individuals have provided those builds. Nobody has voted on them
(because, how could one - I know, I wouldn't). They are not official
relases.
Which to the average user that does not know this policy, can easily be
On Wed, 2012-11-28 at 12:27 +, Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com]
Sent: Mittwoch, 28. November 2012 13:22
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: Volunteers to drive an MSI build
On Nov 28, 2012, at 4
On 11/28/2012 7:20 PM, Noel Butler wrote:
There is far far far more httpd users on other operating systems than
windows, what next, do binaries for all maintained RH, Suse, Gentoo,
BSD, debian.. and so on as well... I mean surely nobody wants
to be seen as catering for the minority
The discussion is moot. The ASF will not provide binary software.
nd
laughs
Yeah, try selling that to the AOO project and see what happens...
Issac
Hey folks,
just to revive this thread again, here's a current comment
thread to our documentation on:
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/platform/windows.html#comment_502
There's a couple of things to take away from this:
* We made no announcements (on our website) that we're essentially
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Igor Galić i.ga...@brainsware.org wrote:
Hey folks,
just to revive this thread again, here's a current comment
thread to our documentation on:
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/platform/windows.html#comment_502
There's a couple of things to take away
Hey folks,
Am 27.11.2012 19:13, schrieb Eric Covener:
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Igor Galići.ga...@brainsware.org wrote:
just to revive this thread again, here's a current comment
thread to our documentation on:
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/platform/windows.html#comment_502
On 11/27/2012 5:11 PM, Guenter Knauf wrote:
Hey folks,
Am 27.11.2012 19:13, schrieb Eric Covener:
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Igor Galići.ga...@brainsware.org
wrote:
just to revive this thread again, here's a current comment
thread to our documentation on:
the only point to resolve is that Gregg cant do the releases self but needs
a PMC for signing and putting up the artifacts - but I'm willing to assist
with that once we get some agreement to put his stuff up
Sorry for not commenting earlier . I'm +0.9 (+1 but know this stuff
is not up my
- Original Message -
On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Issac Goldstand
mar...@beamartyr.net wrote:
Why not go the IIS route and use a c:\wwwroot or the like for non
program-file stuff (logs, cgi-bin, docs, htdocs, conf)?
That is similar to what the Debian package maintainers
On 18 Nov 2012, at 4:41 PM, Igor Galić i.ga...@brainsware.org wrote:
Seeing how much trouble Debian's default layout causes for support
I'd rather we don't mess with that. Our layout is well defined,
well documented and well tested. Moving everything elsewhere is
confusing at best.
+1.
At
Program Files vs. drive root
PF pros
everything in there is protected from users other than admin
PF cons
everything in there is protected from users other than admin which
In Vista/7/8 the administrator account is disabled but you can run
things as admin if your user has admin privileges.
On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Issac Goldstand mar...@beamartyr.netwrote:
Why not go the IIS route and use a c:\wwwroot or the like for non
program-file stuff (logs, cgi-bin, docs, htdocs, conf)?
That is similar to what the Debian package maintainers do (see
On 11/14/2012 3:56 AM, Guenter Knauf wrote:
Am 14.11.2012 12:53, schrieb Guenter Knauf:
I know that Gregg has 'something' which is not MSI but an EXE installer,
but it works, and I asked already a while back if we should push this
out, but there was no further interest / agreement here :-(
On 11/16/2012 12:08 PM, Gregg Smith wrote:
On 11/14/2012 3:56 AM, Guenter Knauf wrote:
Am 14.11.2012 12:53, schrieb Guenter Knauf:
I know that Gregg has 'something' which is not MSI but an EXE
installer,
but it works, and I asked already a while back if we should push this
out, but there was
Le 16/11/2012 21:21, Gregg Smith a écrit :
Another 'something' is NSIS (Nullsoft) which has been picked up by
others and is over at sourceforge.
I used to use it a long time ago but had to give it up for Inno Setup
because it was dropped by the original author.
A nice thing about it is the use
to drive an MSI build
On 11/16/2012 12:08 PM, Gregg Smith wrote:
On 11/14/2012 3:56 AM, Guenter Knauf wrote:
Am 14.11.2012 12:53, schrieb Guenter Knauf:
I know that Gregg has 'something' which is not MSI but an EXE
installer,
but it works, and I asked already a while back if we should push
Am 12.11.2012 17:45, schrieb Issac Goldstand:
but we really need something.
I know that Gregg has 'something' which is not MSI but an EXE installer,
but it works, and I asked already a while back if we should push this
out, but there was no further interest / agreement here :-(
Gregg, can
Am 14.11.2012 12:53, schrieb Guenter Knauf:
Am 12.11.2012 17:45, schrieb Issac Goldstand:
but we really need something.
I know that Gregg has 'something' which is not MSI but an EXE installer,
but it works, and I asked already a while back if we should push this
out, but there was no further
- Original Message -
Am 14.11.2012 12:53, schrieb Guenter Knauf:
Am 12.11.2012 17:45, schrieb Issac Goldstand:
but we really need something.
I know that Gregg has 'something' which is not MSI but an EXE
installer,
but it works, and I asked already a while back if we should
On 12/11/2012 15:15, Igor Galić wrote:
to setup a Windows Server VM/buildbot - and am now looking for
volunteers to step forward. - Just raise your hand here and
update the the above ticket with your Apache ID. (Yes, you need
to be a committer already)
Raises hand...
On 12/11/2012 18:03, Yehuda Katz wrote:
William Rowe said he was working on a new WiX-based installer
That would be great if Bill has the cycles to push it through - I know
he's been uber-busy for a long while already, and he has the best
working knowledge of windows installer-y things so
44 matches
Mail list logo
