Better we stop this thread.
See the post at: http://www.apachelounge.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=8691 ,
please do not reply to that post.
Steffen
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Jagielski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <dev@httpd.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, 06 September, 2007 21:47
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache 2.2.6, 2.0.61 and 1.3.39 release candidate
tarballs for review
On Sep 6, 2007, at 3:25 PM, Steffen wrote:
I'm assuming the "we" is you, right?
It is not just me. We are a team and of course the users. Just as an
example
the other post from me here which is a report from an other webmaster. I
report here test results from the Apache Windows Community from the
Apache
Lounge, mostly I receive them by mail.
You said that "we" need to:
"advise the users not to use 2.2.6 because is not compatible with some
mods"
which, afaik, is not the case. You reported issues with mod_fcgid, which
may be true, but that hasn't been confirmed by anyone else, nor do
I see reports to support the "some mods" statement as well.
Unless, of course, the cryptic phrase "An other report"
actually means "The below is a report from someone else
who is also seeing an issue" instead of "Oh, by the way, I
also tried this personally and I see that mod_cgi is working OK
for me..."...
With all this being the case, I can't see holding up a release nor
can I see us ("us" being the ASF) making some blanket statement that
Win32 users should not use 2.2.6 because it is not compatible with
some mods... If we had some more supporting data for that, then
maybe...
Maybe we have to patch 2.2.6 to get it error-free.
Well, there is the patches directory that, if we discover
a bug, allows people to download the patch and rebuild. Of
course, this all means tracking down and discovering the
bug with some detailed debugging info rather than a "it
doesn't work" :)
