On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 11:01:49AM -0500, Ardo_Vanrangelrooij wrote: > On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 12:36:37AM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote: > > > From: Ardo van Rangelrooij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: Johnie Ingram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, debian-devel@lists.debian.org > > > Subject: proposal for an Apache (web server) task force > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I would like to propose to form an Apache (web server) task force to > > > maintain the > > > Apache packages currently maintained by Johnie Ingram (netgod) (and > > > potentially > > > related packages if the need arises). The current state of Apache and > > > the recent > > > need to fix at least some of the outstanding bugs led me to the > > > conclusion a more > > > active maintenance of these packages is needed. The intend of this > > > proposal is > > > not to simply take over the packages (although it might come to that), > > > but to help > > > in the maintenance of them. > > > > Yes, the bug list is huge. I'm not subscribed to -devel, but this thread > > was mentioned on IRC and thus forwarded to me. > > > > > As the first step I propose to add an Uploaders field to the package > > > (once we have > > > a list of people). > > > > > > Some of the other things this task force would do are > > > > > > - writing up guidelines for packaging Apache modules (a kind of policy > > > doc) > > > - migration to Apache 2 (IIRC an ITP for this has already been filed by > > > somebody) > > > > "What is 'not on a cold day in hell'?" ;) > > And you react like this exactly why? Perhaps I should have said 'could' > instead of > 'would' and make the second item 'support in migrating to Apache2'. I > certainly didn't > want to imply that you and Thom would be out of business because of this. > But I'm sure > that we cannot drop Apache2 in place and assume everything keeps working fine > without > a hitch. I was merely thinking that this task force could participate in > testing and > porting stuff over. There's no need to feel threatened by this proposal. > You're work > is appreciated.
No, I don't feel at all threatened, it's just that apache2 is still in alpha and nowhere near ready to replace apache; not by a long shot. > > Thom May ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and myself are maintaining apache2. If you > > want to > > email anything related, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is the address; that > > goes to both of us. Currently it's not in Debian because Thom's laptop > > has blown up. He did very extensive hacking on said laptop (which was > > really cool), and it's back in the UK (irony, since he's a Pom > > backpacker here in .au) getting fixed. There were no backups or > > anything, so I'm just waiting from some stuff from Thom's tree. > > > > In the meantime, I've toyed with modperl-2.0 and php4 for apache2. I got > > a successful install of php4 after an apache2 install, but I need to do > > silly build and apache2 voodoo to get it integrated. I'm currently > > working on it, but I don't exactly have a lot of time. > > > > The current place for my packages is > > http://kabuki.sfarc.net/apache2/README. Note that this is strictly > > non-US due to modules/ssl and modules/tls in the apache2 source. These > > packages don't include mod_perl2 and php4; if you want you can grab them > > from CVS and attempt to build. > > > > > I also propose to set up a mailing list for this. > > > > Feel free, but apache2 is nowhere near ready for prime-time. Hell, they > > haven't even agreed on a release that should be a beta candidate since > > 2.0.18, which was ... a long time ago. I'd give it probably more than a > > year before I even thought about letting it loose in production. > > I didn't expect the migration to happen overnight. But there are certainly a > lot of gotchas when moving to Apache2 which need to be sorted out and > resolved. > If we have a year to do this, all the better given the time certain things > might take. I think that we need to maintain them separately for quite some time; even when apache2 *does* replace apache, we should still have an apache1 package. > > I also got bored a while ago, and discovered that 2.0.24 builds cleanly > > (and works) on Progeny. > > Cool! > > > :) d > > (CC all replies to me as I'm not on -devel). > > Done. Thanks :) -d -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <jem> I got Linux for Christmas... but it don't work... I'm taking it back to the shops <jem> I got Debian from Dad, RedHat from Mum, and slackware from my brother... he's no brother of mine no more
