On May 31, 2017 1:32 PM, "Helmut K. C. Tessarek" <tessa...@evermeet.cx> wrote:
On 2017-05-31 11:46, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > If my assumptions above are wrong, ignore this thought... but if > the goal is to drive adoption of our 2.6 implementation of http2, > then simply dropping "experimental" seems unwise. Upgrading > its status from "experimental" (which I read as -alpha at best) > to a "beta" release of mod_http2 in 2.4.26 might be a really good > idea to drive interest in advance of 2.6, while averting a half-decade > long support effort of that specific module on the already five year > old stale branch. This topic is also about perception. Most people won't use http2 in production, if it is marked as experimental or beta. These people might look at other server software instead. How long will people have to wait for 2.6? This is a fair question, because I have no idea what your plans are. But I guess it won't be for a while (timeframe maybe even years?). Very fair observation, which is the root of my question. If we don't intend to support 2.4 http2 in parallel for years once 2.6 is released, those users you mention would be wise not to deploy it in production. We see plenty of httpd instances running 3-5 year old or much older versions. Those users who keep their software refreshed frequently would be wise to adopt http2 already, and those are the users we want to encourage.
