Subject: Re: apr update
To: Jeremy C. Reed <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai <email@example.com>
Date: 06/29/2005 22:21:20
-On [20050629 22:12], Jeremy C. Reed (firstname.lastname@example.org) wrote:
>Your work and diligence is greatly appreciated.
We all do our thing, so your comment goes to all. :)
>One thing to note is that some developers who work on specific packages or
>specific areas may overlook mails targeted to them on the tech-pkg list
>(due to a lot of emails or not being subscribed).
>You may want to carbon copy or email the developers (epg and tron)
>directly that may be effected or have valuable feedback. And/or use
I've emailed epg for the Subversion at least.
I will keep your suggestion in mind (I already do that for some stuff
indeed), however this was an issue where I thought the collective could
provide valuable insight. :)
>Also, is there any reason to keep apache 2.0.x around when we update to
>new Apache 2.1? Are there three branches of "stable official release"
>Apache HTTPD development now?
Yes. 2.1 is labelled development right now. So see 2.0 as 'stable'.
However, some people might already need the 2.1 features, like large file
support, which might warrant two pkgsrc entries. 2.1 will become 2.2.
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(at)wxs.nl> / asmodai / kita no mono
Free Tibet! http://www.savetibet.org/ | http://ashemedai.deviantart.com/
http://www.tendra.org/ | http://www.in-nomine.org/
Agnosco veteris vestigia flammae...