On Sat, Oct 16, 2004 at 12:58:48AM +0100, Nick Kew wrote: > On Fri, 15 Oct 2004, Luc Pardon wrote: > > The usual fate of patches in bugzilla is that, even if they are > appropriate for inclusion, they need a committer to take sufficient > interest to review and incorporate them. A chronic shortage of round > tuits means this is rather hit-and-miss.
Quite true and quite the cause of consternation to those of us lurkers out here eager to help if offered the opportunity ... > > One more thing: I became aware that the "flexible interface for > > mod_log_config" patch (# 25014) also allows conditioning on status > > code(s), and there are three other contributed patches against > > mod_log_config waiting for a decision (# 28037, 29449 and 31311). I am > > willing to ensure compatibility with any or all of them if desired. > > If you can fix a whole bunch of related bugs on bugzilla without your > patch becoming big and complex, that adds value but still doesn't > guarantee anything. > > Ask yourself: is your code sufficiently different to anything we already > have to merit releasing separately as a third-party module? If yes, then > do that. If no, then it's probably appropriate to offer a patch. > My guess would be no. What are the general requirements to getting a patch or module included in the contrib/ directory? And on that topic, what happened to http://www.apache.org/dist/httpd/contrib/ ? Thanks! Glenn
