On 09/09/2005, at 10:02 AM, Jim Gallacher wrote:
As far as some future version breaking compatibility, I favour a
bigger jump in the major number: 3.2 -> 4.0. This is server software
after all, and some people may prefer to maintain an older version for
a longer period, foregoing new features
Nicolas Lehuen wrote:
2005/9/8, Jorey Bump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Jim Gallacher wrote:
Nicolas Lehuen wrote:
Well, why not keep our plan of releasing 3.2 ASAP and save this
problem for a later 3.2.x as a bug fix ?
Making subsequent bug-fix releases should be fast and easy. We cannot
afford t
2005/9/8, Jorey Bump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Jim Gallacher wrote:
> > Nicolas Lehuen wrote:
> >
> >> Well, why not keep our plan of releasing 3.2 ASAP and save this
> >> problem for a later 3.2.x as a bug fix ?
> >> Making subsequent bug-fix releases should be fast and easy. We cannot
> >> afford to
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
On Thu, 8 Sep 2005, Jim Gallacher wrote:
I don't have FreeBSD, or any experience with any BSD, but I won't let
that stop me from commenting. :)
I don't see apr-0 listed in your includes in the above output.
APR_THREAD_MUTEX_UNNESTED is defined in apr_thread
On Thu, 8 Sep 2005, Jim Gallacher wrote:
I don't have FreeBSD, or any experience with any BSD, but I won't let that
stop me from commenting. :)
I don't see apr-0 listed in your includes in the above output.
APR_THREAD_MUTEX_UNNESTED is defined in apr_thread_mutex.h, which on debian
is in /us
Jim Gallacher wrote:
Nicolas Lehuen wrote:
Well, why not keep our plan of releasing 3.2 ASAP and save this
problem for a later 3.2.x as a bug fix ?
Making subsequent bug-fix releases should be fast and easy. We cannot
afford to repeat the long hiatus between 3.1.3 and 3.2, with a long
period of
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
Anybody got FreeBSD? I'm getting this. This is an old and possibly
misconfigured system, so the problem could be on my end.
FreeBSD 4.9
apache 2.0.53 (from ports)
python 2.3.3
$ make
Compiling for DSO.
/usr/local/sbin/apxs
-I/home/grisha/src/tmp/mod_pyth
Nicolas Lehuen wrote:
Well, why not keep our plan of releasing 3.2 ASAP and save this
problem for a later 3.2.x as a bug fix ?
Making subsequent bug-fix releases should be fast and easy. We cannot
afford to repeat the long hiatus between 3.1.3 and 3.2, with a long
period of time without any offic
I don't use sessions enough to comment on whether this is an appropriate
change for mod_python or not, but I would suggest that you log an
enhancement request at:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MODPYTHON?report=select
This will ensure any request is not overlooked. It is also preferred
On Thu, 8 Sep 2005, Nicolas Lehuen wrote:
Releasing often may need a bit of work on the web site side, however.
with respect to modpython.org, no, not at all. with httpd.apache.org -
it's a little bit of work, but not more than 15 minutes.
I feel that updating the web site is the current
Well, why not keep our plan of releasing 3.2 ASAP and save this
problem for a later 3.2.x as a bug fix ?
Making subsequent bug-fix releases should be fast and easy. We cannot
afford to repeat the long hiatus between 3.1.3 and 3.2, with a long
period of time without any official bug fix.
I agree t
Jim Gallacher wrote ..
> Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
> >
> > I've been away this weekend - just got back, but I'm too busy to try
> to
> > read all the multiple-interpreter related comments. I guess my question
> > is - can someone provide a quick summary of how far we are from 3.2.1b
> >
Hello,
I would like to point to some simple bug in session handling. The problem
occurs when you want to have persistens sessions, i.e. the ones which
will stay after the user close the browser window (this is useful for
example if you want to let him stay logged-on). For this reason it is
nec
13 matches
Mail list logo
