> On Feb 16, 2016, at 4:08 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group > <ruediger.pl...@vodafone.com> wrote: > > > >> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >> Von: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com] >> Gesendet: Montag, 15. Februar 2016 23:51 >> An: dev@httpd.apache.org >> Betreff: Re: motorz >> >> The more I think of it, the more I think we should just >> remove motorz and simple from trunk... Or keep them around >> but not really worry about them. >> >> The fun and interesting stuff is already in event, and although >> it might be nice to, for example, move the worker_pool stuff >> to a simply apr_thread_pool, I wonder what it buys us, if >> anything. > > I guess APRisation has its benefits (but its drawbacks as well, due to the > stricter > versioning rules over there), but I guess we can do this iteratively > with event. Nevertheless it might be good to keep motorz and simple > around even if dormant to keep the ideas for these steps on the table. > As you sound that you don't feel these steps are all too sexy for doing them > they might be for someone else. Probably if someone can define them more > clearly a project for GSOC? >
Just an update: There was a small chat on the #httpd-dev IRC channel and it sounds like others see the benefit, if not the actual need (yet), for keeping motorz as a semi-active activity, so I will keep on plugging on it as will others. There may be things much more easily implemented in motorz than in event; also, event is a great MPM but, it has to be admitted, is pretty complex. motorz is an easier MPM to jump in with.
