Henning Schmiedehausen wrote: > [... to the thread as a whole, not specifically to Jim's mail ...] > > Let's just say, I usually run alpha-level code in a sandbox for a while > to find problems, We could use it e.g. on people.a.o or maybe httpd.a.o > if you are so keen on it. :-)
Sorry this seems to be a communications problem. Trunk on httpd is approximately as robust as the last stable release. But it is not stable. httpd alpha's (n.odd revs) represent an API in flux; users and developers are warned that the API can and likely will change before the next stable release. The alpha period provides a window during which 3rd party module developers can propose patches or ask for API enhancements or changes by actually running code which is headed for general release. The beta's (n.even.0 ...) are the first chance for module authors to stabilize their add ins and for users to point out to us very very odd edge cases due to their unique [cough, cough] configurations. The GA stable releases (n.even.x) represent a pretty much unbroken chain of bug fixes, and energies turn to the trunk again to develop new ideas. So there was little risk w.r.t. deploying 2.3.0 alpha on our infra; it only means that the folks deploying it had to adjust for new configuration syntax, API changes and watch things closely. They did this, and have therefore found a fix to a problem which would have later plagued infra. If the httpd developers weren't an active part of the infra team, I might share your concerns. If I didn't understand the health and state of the code, I'd likely share your concerns. But as I point out above, you have little cause for concern with httpd deployments.
