[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: RFC: Remove of "apache2" package
From: Matthias Scheler <tron%NetBSD.org@localhost>
Considering that ...
1.) ... the Apache foundation advises to use 2.2 instead of 2.0 ...
2.) ... upgrading from 2.0 to 2.2 requires none or minimal configuration
3.) ... there have been reports about problems in the "apache2" package
in "pkgsrc" in the past which people resolved by using the "apache22"
package instead ...
... I would like to remove the "apache2" package from "pkgsrc".
This is very much premature. The correct test is that
the number of people who
rely on the apache2 package, and
we can't in good faith tell them that they are completely lame for
not having upgraded
is vanishingly small, balanced with
the maintenance cost to pkgsrc of having apache2 is big
So yes, ASF is saying to use 2.2, and that's different from "if you are
still using 2.0 you are a total idiot and we have not sympathy for you".
They didn't say that they won't release new 2.0 to fix security bugs.
Right now I am not seeing that it's hard to maintain apache2; I haven't
done any of the updates but would expect just a DISTNAME/distinfo change
and a quick PLIST check, and not a big deal.
Certainly the default apache should be 2.2, and we can put in DESCR for
apache2 that ASF recommends to use 2.2 instead, with both "people should
migrate" and "new installations SHOULD NOT use 2.0".. And probably the
apr option should default to the one that works with 2.2, so subversion
gets built in a way that works when you want 2.2. (2.0 works fine with
the apr1 that 2.2 needs.)
I know people with 2.0 installations, and even a 1.3 installation, and
while I would say they ought to upgrade, and I can't flame them as
totally lame. Well, the 1.3 is borderline now, but not 2.
Main Index |
Thread Index |