>> Many users are still using Apache 2.0.24-alpha (including myself),
>> or even 2.0.18-beta (including IBM iSeries team porting Apache 2.0).
Ok, ok, I could understand your all developpers point of vue,
but let me say it appears just too elitist.
You just can't ask people (developpers or users)
to grab each day the latest APR/Apache from CVS,
rebuild them, and then try compile your module
against them.
Don't forget that many of us must evaluate
a KNOWN Apache 2.0 in real environnement.
The most known are Apache sites which use the released
version 2.0.24 :)
We could do that a each release (2.0.24/2.0.25) but
not in real-time ;)
There was an interesting discussion on new-httpd this week
about mod_gzip, and more generally moving API, code change
and broken stuff
Like many contributors, whoes OSS is not the paid time,
I just didn't have time to be sync with real-time CVS.
And in that case I avoid 'gestation' problems and could
concentrated only on majors (even if alpha/beta) release.
>All this, of course, UNTIL an official final version comes
>out, that's when
>I'll start caring about backward compatibility.
We didn't have to be compatible with 2.0.11 but may be we could
try to keep compatible with one or two latest snap, in our example
2.0.24/2.0.25.
>That's my idea, but I would love to hear the other contributors to the
>WebApp module to tell me what they think, Ryan, J.F., Colin, Thom...
And I'd like the same for mod_jk developpers AND users :)
>Like, you've answered a lot of questions on tomcat-user about
>the WebApp
>module :) :) :)
My involment is in mod_jk, not mod_webapp, I coudln't answer
question on something I'm not involved and so not specialist.
But If you recall, I've built a RPM for mod_webapp some time
again just before you change everything to use APR.
>That's a task I'm handling, and I believe I've
>been pretty
>good at. There's no unanswered question on the WebApp module
>on the users
>list. (In comparison to...)
Comparison to what ? do you want to compare with the number of
question about mod_jk ? Normal, more users play with mod_jk than
with mod_webapp :)
>> That's a part of the problem in mod_webapp with APR.
>
>Choosing APR has been my decision from the beginning. If you
>guys didn't
>want to do it, why not voting -1 when I dropped the code in
>CVS?
Since you speak about that, I don't even recall the discussion
on starting mod_webapp instead of using and extending mod_jk.
I'm sorry to say that it was something decided outside the
tomcat-dev mailing-list
>Now it's
>there, I believe it's good. You might not like it, as I don't like what
>you're doing, but, hey, we're forced to coexist on the same
>mailing list.
Yes, it's there and we'll see if users switch from mod_jserv
mod_jk to mod_webapp, but in the meanwhile, I won't let
mod_jk users in the middle of river (au milieu du gué),
and still correct bugs and add requested features ;)
>So, as I don't piss you off on what you're doing, please, you
>do the same.
>:) :) :) :) :)
Je ne comprends pas très bien l'anglais, désolé ;--)
