Garrett D'Amore wrote: >>> Indeed, this begs a question: wouldn't it simply be easier to remove >>> mod_jserv with the removal of Apache 1.3.x. I'm assuming that if >>> we've not already EOF'd Apache 1.3 in favor of 2.0, that we will do >>> so at some point in the future? >> >> Simple removal of JServ seemed to be easier, faster and less >> controversial. So that question of EOF Apache 1.3 is beyond this case. >> But yes there are from time to time some discussions which might lead >> to it. > > I'm not sure that its much less controversial for Solaris > Nevada/Next. It seems like EOF of 1.3 is something that ought to > occur at about this time, and that the time is ripe for it. (Apache has > both Apache 2.0 and Apache 2.2 as release trains available at this time > -- so 1.3 is actually two releases behind schedule -- continuing to ship > it makes about as much sense as continuing to ship Gnome 1.x -- actually > less since ISV software generally doesn't dynamically link against the > Apache server.) > > I think personally, I'd rather go through just a single EOF process than > go through two of them.
There used to be some vendor specific Apache 1.3 modules (e.g. from Oracle, IBM). I'm not sure whether all these have their equivalent for Apache 2.2 now. So with all respect to Gnome I wouldn't compare it here. This case is here so we can remove Apache JServ as soon as possible since there is clear migration path. While Apache 1.3 removal would require usual time off. Petr
