On Sep 20, 2005, at 6:03 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
I thank everyone who's voicing an opinion - it's very important
that we
come to concensus.
I'm incredibly concerned however that most votes on this issue are
from
our 'newcomers' - those without the experience of the pains and
problems
encountered in previous Apache release cycles. I appreciate all of
the
enthusiasm, drive and forward momentum! But I'm worried that a policy
we arrived at, following the contentious and problematic 2.0 GA, would
be tossed aside so quickly without any feedback from our 'older' devs.
So this message is not at our newcomers, welcome to you all. Rather,
I'm addressing this post to our 'old timers' who did struggle through
the 1.3.x and 2.0.x GA process, to add your thoughts and observations.
I recall the days when all modules were simply lumped in
the ./src/ directory :)
Anyway, the 'experimental' module directory, to me, has
always been a sort of "preview look" into what's
new and exciting in httpd-land. They are modules that
people can use and play with, and be part of the
development effort with.
It may be that we simply need to restructure the
module dir concept, with 2 dirs under modules:
modules/supported (or modules/production ?)
modules/experimental (modules/in-development ?)
you get the idea. We then have the same layout under
each, so that there is a modules/experimental/loggers
directory and a modules/supported/loggers one for example.
configure is made aware of the "noteworthiness" of
the modules/experimental directory and prints out
a little disclaimer that "you have selected an
experimental/in-development module; please understand
that this module has not been completely tested, but
we welcome your feedback, bug-reports and, especially,
your patches!"
