Re: Many packaged programs that are doing the same thing

2008-03-07 Thread Steve Greenland
On 03-Mar-08, 15:26 (CST), Michelle Konzack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Am 2008-02-29 10:38:56, schrieb Guus Sliepen: > > > > Again, I'm not saying there should only be one light-weight http daemon. > > But more than 10? > > ...and if someone want to study HOW a Web-Server is working and HOW >

Re: Many packaged programs that are doing the same thing

2008-03-07 Thread Michelle Konzack
Am 2008-02-29 10:38:56, schrieb Guus Sliepen: > There is nothing wrong with having multiple packages in Debian that do > the same thing. However, you can wonder whether it is really helpful for > the user to have 10 or more light-weight http daemons to choose from. As > a distribution, we have a mu

Re: Many packaged programs that are doing the same thing

2008-02-29 Thread Petter Reinholdtsen
[William Pitcock] > Why not? Debian ships more than 10 different shells, media players, etc. > Why should an httpd be not included because there are already others. > This isn't about being "helpful", this is about _choice_. You seem to assume that choice is good, and more choices are better. Thi

Re: Many packaged programs that are doing the same thing

2008-02-29 Thread Andreas Tille
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008, Guus Sliepen wrote: For example: if two light-weight httpds have a very similar feature set, then if the two upstream maintainers can be made to work together and create a single httpd with the best qualities of both, then that will reduce choice, but the one choice left is

Re: Many packaged programs that are doing the same thing

2008-02-29 Thread Guus Sliepen
On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 04:58:11AM -0600, William Pitcock wrote: [...] > > When we see something like this, maybe we should contact > > the upstream authors and suggest that they work together, so that the > > number of light-weight daemons to choose from decreases but the quality > > of the remai

Re: Many packaged programs that are doing the same thing

2008-02-29 Thread William Pitcock
Hi, On Fri, 2008-02-29 at 10:38 +0100, Guus Sliepen wrote: > On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 08:02:39PM -0600, William Pitcock wrote: > > > > Even there, it looks very much like other "very small" webservers, > > > such as boa, bozohttpd, cherokee, fnord, lighttpd, micro-httpd, > > > mini-httpd or thttpd

Many packaged programs that are doing the same thing

2008-02-29 Thread Guus Sliepen
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 08:02:39PM -0600, William Pitcock wrote: > > Even there, it looks very much like other "very small" webservers, > > such as boa, bozohttpd, cherokee, fnord, lighttpd, micro-httpd, > > mini-httpd or thttpd. What does it do better than any of them? Or > > worse? Or different?