APACHE 2.3 STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2005-12-16 16:06:45 -0500 (Fri, 16 Dec 2005) $]
The current version of this file can be found at:
* http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk/STATUS
Documentation status is maintained seperately and can be found at:
* docs/STATUS in this source tree, or
* http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/STATUS
Consult the following STATUS files for information on related projects:
* http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/apr/apr/trunk/STATUS
* http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/apr/apr-util/trunk/STATUS
Patches considered for backport are noted in their branches' STATUS:
* http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/branches/1.3.x/STATUS
* http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/branches/2.0.x/STATUS
* http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/STATUS
Release history:
[NOTE that x.{odd}.z versions are strictly Alpha/Beta releases,
while x.{even}.z versions are Stable/GA releases.]
2.3.0 : in development
Contributors looking for a mission:
* Just do an egrep on TODO or XXX in the source.
* Review the bug database at: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/
* Review the PatchAvailable bugs in the bug database:
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEWbug_status=ASSIGNEDbug_status=REOPENEDproduct=Apache+httpd-2.0keywords=PatchAvailable
After testing, you can append a comment saying Reviewed and tested.
* Open bugs in the bug database.
CURRENT RELEASE NOTES:
RELEASE SHOWSTOPPERS:
* Handling of non-trailing / config by non-default handler is broken
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apache-httpd-devm=105451701628081w=2
jerenkrantz asks: Why should this block a release?
wsanchez agrees: this may be a change in behavior, but isn't
clearly wrong, and even if so, it doesn't seem like a
showstopper.
* the edge connection filter cannot be removed
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apache-httpd-devm=105366252619530w=2
jerenkrantz asks: Why should this block a release?
stas replies: because it requires a rewrite of the filters stack
implementation (you have suggested that) and once 2.2 is
released you can't do that anymore.
CURRENT VOTES:
* If the parent process dies, should the remaining child processes
gracefully self-terminate. Or maybe we should make it a runtime
option, or have a concept of 2 parent processes (one being a
hot spare).
See: Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Self-destruct: Ken, Martin, Lars
Not self-destruct: BrianP, Ian, Cliff, BillS
Make it runtime configurable: Aaron, jim, Justin, wrowe, rederpj, nd
/* The below was a concept on *how* to handle the problem */
Have 2 parents: +1: jim
-1: Justin, wrowe, rederpj, nd
+0: Lars, Martin (while standing by, could it do
something useful?)
* Make the worker MPM the default MPM for threaded Unix boxes.
+1: Justin, Ian, Cliff, BillS, striker, wrowe, nd
+0: BrianP, Aaron (mutex contention is looking better with the
latest code, let's continue tuning and testing), rederpj, jim
-0: Lars
pquerna: Do we want to change this for 2.2?
RELEASE NON-SHOWSTOPPERS BUT WOULD BE REAL NICE TO WRAP THESE UP:
* Patches submitted to the bug database:
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEWbug_status=ASSIGNEDbug_status=REOPENEDproduct=Apache+httpd-2.0keywords=PatchAvailable
* Filter stacks and subrequests, redirects and fast redirects.
There's at least one PR that suffers from the current unclean behaviour
(which lets the server send garbage): PR 17629
nd says: Every subrequest should get its own filter stack with the
subreq_core filter as bottom-most. That filter does two things:
- swallow EOS buckets
- redirect the data stream to the upper request's (rr-main)
filter chain directly after the subrequest's starting
point.
Once we have a clean solution, we can try to optimize
it, so that the server won't be slow down too much.
* RFC 2616 violations.
Closed PRs: 15857.
Open PRs: 15852, 15859, 15861, 15864, 15865, 15866, 15868, 15869,
15870, 16120, 16125, 16126, 16133, 16135, 16136, 16137,
16138, 16139, 16140, 16142, 16518, 16520, 16521,
jerenkrantz says: need to decide how many we need to backport and/or
if these rise to showstopper status.
wrowe suggests: it would be nice to see MUST v.s. SHOULD v.s. MAY
out of this list, without reviewing them individually.
* There is a bug in how we sort some hooks, at
