Hi Bill,
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Gregg L. Smith wrote:
> I mentioned on another thread; the builds are very closely related,
so it's
pretty simple to check them out side by side or put them into the same
server.
Most defiantly when it comes to building them and I now understand that
thinking.
Not really a release issue at all. But something we might do more to
promote. I'd think moving from beta to GA might help that? I'd been
stubborn about GA mostly due to protocol issues (almost entirely now
solved) and versioning, but have come to the conclusion that 0.9.X might
be a perfectly good GA, while 1.0.0 might introduce some API version
expectations and consistency for user/developers.
Understood, GA can't hurt with the Beta refusenics. Those of use willing
to use beta there are no worries about. Promote is the key word, at all
levels.
Yup :) I find it funny the number of them you can yum install/apt get
from any distro.
Yes, I have a Fedora box and have seen just this. Plenty on the Windows
side as well. This is why it made the list.
But **we don't vote on binaries** :) We vote on source code,
This is not what I was implying, sorry if it came out that way and I
know it got jumbled into the thread. I was more trying to address the
lack of interest. Remember, your email covered two things really, voting
and lack of interest to vote.
Maybe I see things too simple or simply incorrectly, how I see it is
end-user use is proportionate to availability, dev interest may be
proportionate to users interest?
Maybe it is just me but life is cost/benefit weighing at every turn.
What is the benefit for developers to spend all the time working
on/having interest in a project that has no interest at the user level.
I wouldn't waste my time.
How does one promote user interest, make it available. If you build it
they will come sort of thing. It's two dogs chasing each others tails,
someone needs to step in and seed this process, this is one case where
policy I think is more hindering than helpful.
You need to have releases to get users to use it and generate interest,
you need to have the votes to get the release. Self defeating policy
when it comes to "new" things that could box you into a no win
situation. mod_fcgid while new to the ASF is not "new" by any means
which is why I want to shy away from it in this discussion.
mod_aspdotnet you say, apples and okra as it was a Windows only thing
IIRC and therefore an uphill battle from the start.
Windows users are spoiled rotten cause they are bred that way and
therefore will require a binary since not many Windows users will
compile, you opened that barn door on 6/20/98. Linux users are really
just as spoiled for the most part but are fortunate in that their
distros provide binaries via yum/apt get so they do not have to make as
much noise to the ASF to get what they want in binaries. MS is not going
to provide a binary for their users. This is the only reason why I
mentioned binaries. Although Windows binaries may be available at a few
places, the first place people are going to look is httpd.apache.org.
Regardless, it seems the threat to dissolve this project woke some
people that needed to be awaken. In that sense it certainly worked. I'm
looking forward to 0.9.6 after you crush the build problems Guenter
pointed to. I took a little time to look over the docs last night and
will do so again every evening till I think I have a handle on it so as
I can give the next run a decent try and at least say works great or
sucks big time :) I just hope you can now muster your needed three votes.
Regards,
Gregg
