Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > That's just crap. I can say the same thing. PHP is threadsafe, it's not > my responsibility that libxyz is not. Any Apache 2.0 module running under > a threaded mpm linked against libxyz that contains non-threadsafe code is > going to have exactly the same problem unless the module sticks in > mutexes. > > Right now in the PHP world we simply tell people that they should not > upgrade to Apache 2.0. If everyone ends up doing that, then I am sorry to > say, but Apache 2.0 is dead and the current Netcraft statement is going to > be a recurring thing. > > As a platform there are some cool possibilities with Apache 2.0 and I'd > like to see it do well, but as a module author, being told to piss off and > deal with the problem myself is not any way to encourage 3rd-party module > support for Apache 2.0. In the end the users out there don't really give > a crap about which web server they use. They just want something that > works. Apache was always the web server that just worked. I strongly > feel it is our job to help make sure that Apache remain the web server > that just works. Like it or not, but the web server is the foundation for > all the projects under the ASF umbrella and if we fuck up Apache, every > sub-project will be hurt in the process.
FWIW, I'm +1 on what Rasmus says - at least for widely used libraries. Obviously anything internal to PHP is PHP's problem. But anything everyone uses is our problem. However, I would advocate fixing the libraries rather than wrapping them where possible. Cheers, Ben. -- http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html http://www.thebunker.net/ Available for contract work. "There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he doesn't mind who gets the credit." - Robert Woodruff
