On 17 Apr 2018, at 5:40 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>> I’m not following the “all in vain”. >> >> This patch in v2.4.33 was dine specifically to fix an issue in Xenial, and >> Ubuntu is on the case: >> >> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apache2/+bug/1750356 > > Then Ubuntu is distributing neither httpd 2.4.33 nor 2.4.29, as > published by the Apache HTTP Project. This is another example of > cherry picking a miscellany of fixes. Yes. This is the very definition of the Ubuntu “Long Term Support” releases. It is also the very definition of “Redhat Enterprise Linux”. > If a distributor shipped a source package of something called Apache > httpd 2.4.29, which is obviously not .29 but .29+{stuff}, what would > be our reaction? No reaction. There is no source of confusion. The distros all use (for example) v2.4.29 as their baseline version, and then a sub-version-number that to indicate their patch level on top of ours. No distribution (that I am aware of) ships something called Apache httpd v2.4.29. The distributions have been doing this nigh on two decades - the stability of a given software baseline which will not suddenly break at 3am some arbitrary Sunday in the middle of the holidays is the very product they’re selling. This works because they ship a baseline, plus carefully curated fixes as required by their communities, trading off the needs of their communities and stability. None of this is new. It turns out that we, the httpd project (and apr), have had the exact same approach to stability that the distros have had for the last two decades. As a result, you can take an ASF supplied httpd RPM and drop it into Redhat Enterprise Linux and this “just works”, because our ABI guarantees align exactly with the ABI guarantees of the stable distros. Regards, Graham —
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
