>> Whether we ship or add support to bundle multiple minor releases or a
>> single apache 2 release (like the way how linux has successfully done
>> so) is probably the big question. I guess, the answer to this question
>> also depends on how much is the incompatibility between minor releases
>> and how many customers very much want to have multiple minor releases.
>>
> Given the differences between 2.2 and 2.0, I think both need to be
> available for quite some time (as some vendors of proprietary modules
> still haven't made the jump).
I had a look at various other Linux distributions which support Apache.
Fedora,
SuSE,
Ubuntu
Debian
Gentoo
All of them install Apache1 and Apache2 under a different dir. But all Apache
2.x
get installed under the same directory (.../apache2/...). So, the files get
overwritten.
These are distributed as separate packages and the user has the option to go
for the
latest one or continue to use the older version. Those who wanted to run
multiple
versions of the product had to do so manually using the source.
Since installing from scratch is a tedious and error prone
task, especially for a newbie, we can avoid this by supporting multiple version
installations.
>> Also, I am curious as to how Apache SMF scripts will work / look when we
>> ship multiple minor releases or will we start shipping multiple SMF
>> scripts to accommodate multiple minor releases as well.
>>
> Picking the version by setting a property seems like a simple way or
> possibly as part of the FMRI.
There is no need to add a new SMF script. We can use SMF property to set the
version and modify the existing script to choose the server based on this
property.
-- Seema.
