At 4:22 PM -0800 3/2/02, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: >On Sat, Mar 02, 2002 at 02:30:34PM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote: >> I'm sorry, but this is BOGUS! I want to see a 2.0 release, but adding >> code that is wrong just so that we can get a GA release is NOT the way >> to go about doing that. The whole point of Open Source is that we don't >> have to cut corners just to meet release dates. Do it right, it will >> take less time in the long run. >> >> I am really disappointed that the attitude on this list right now is >> "ship it soon regardless of quality or maintainability." > >I believe that you are incorrectly trying to introduce stateful >protocols into an architecture that explicitly forbids it. >Furthermore, I don't think you'd be addressing the real problem >here by adding this extra level of complexity. >
Except if we're willing to go 90% to be able to make the Apache framework protocol (read: HTTP) ignorant, then the framework must not be so short sited as to assume statelessness. It's easier to add a concept of a protocol that spans multiple requests and then for HTTP have the protocol "be" the request timeline, then it is for the reverse. With all that being said, I think that the fix Ryan's working on might be sufficient. As far as what should be in 2.0 compared to 2.1, well, there comes a time when it makes sense to stop polishing the turd. If we wait for 2.0 to be "perfect" then it'll never go GA. I can both of your guy's points. -- =========================================================================== Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ "A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both and deserve neither" - T.Jefferson
