Hello Alvaro, I'm not closely following the feature development. I remember there were a few things that you mentioned were going to be in version 0.6: - proxying to a backend web server (something similar to mod_proxy in apache and lighttpd) - more flexible fastcgi support (configure by path as well as file type) I don't see them in your list. Maybe they have already been implemented?
My other question is, Cherokee has a Windows version. What features is it still missing in the Windows version compared with the Unix version? I'm asking since I intend to use it on Windows production servers. -- Thanks, Jack Saturday, February 23, 2008, 11:08:48 AM, you wrote: > It does also make sense to me. However, I would reduce the new feature > number in 0.8 and 0.9 to de minimum. In my opinion, a good roadmap > would be: > 0.8.0 > ----- > [ ] New header entry > [ ] Mime encodings separated from mime types > [ ] Chuncked encoding > 0.9.0 > ----- > [ ] full signal handling > [ ] flexible internal error reporting (to syslog?) > [ ] HTTP/1.0 speed up (not high priority) > [ ] HTTP/1.1 pipelining speed up (not high priority) > I would postpone the rest to 1.0 or later, actually. In fact, these > improvements should not take us much time and we could release 1.0 > within... a couple of months? > I think that bumping to a 1.0 release as soon as possible is a good > thing. But, even more important than reaching the 1.0 milestone soon, > is to release new versions often. > -- > Greetings, alo. > http://www.alobbs.com/ _______________________________________________ Cherokee mailing list [email protected] http://cherokee-project.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cherokee
