On Mon, Apr 01, 2002 at 12:09:35PM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > MPMs should never exist in modules/. > > I don't think a 'broken mpm' is any worse than an MPM that doesn't > compile at all. But if you want to insist that --with-mpm=perchild yields > some sort of "This MPM is experimental -- it is not expected to work > at this time" ... that would be fine. > > But I see no reason not to fold these fixes into 2.0.34 unless they start > touching files outside of server/mpm/perchild/
I'm not saying that we shouldn't include the perchild changes, I'm just saying we shouldn't imply that by including them the perchild MPM is any less experimental. In fact, I think we should go one step further and create a server/mpm/experimental to put things like perchild, leader-follower, door, and whatever else comes along. I'm all for a message from the configure script, but I don't think that it is obvious enough by itself. -aaron
