Re: [TALLY] Release mod_aspdotnet build 2004?
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: So do what every project asks you to do, read the README in the .zip ball :) Note that it's out of date in one respect; installer (now compiled from the InstallShield 11.5 flavor) can no longer integrate into the build schema. You would get more out of reading the 'deployment notes' section of; http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/mod_aspdotnet/trunk/README.txt Since README is out-of-date with respect to "installer"; I'll whack that note. Update committed, thanks for your question that triggered a revisit, Colm :)
Re: [TALLY] Release mod_aspdotnet build 2004?
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote: On Thu, Jul 20, 2006 at 01:09:19PM +0200, Trent Nelson wrote: 2. Download .netCHARTING 4.0 evaluation version for .NET 1.1 from http://www.dotnetcharting.com/download.aspx. They want my email address, so that's a non-starter. Are there any other ASP applications, liberally licensed, that would serve as a good test? Assuming you have Windows, you have no trouble obtaining one of the .NET SDK's (not the "Windows Platform SDK", but the ".NET SDK" with C#, VB.NET, samples, etc etc) - you will find two trees in that install; QuickStart\, and Samples\. You can make either of those an Alias + AspNetMount, enable AspNet Files in the appropriate , and run either the MakeAll.bat file or just nmake the makefile in the sample/quickstart directory you want to take for a spin. If you install VisualStudio .NET (2002) or later - you probably already installed the .NET SDK as part of that installation... so it comes free. 4. Edit httdp.conf and add the following: # ASP.NET Configuration LoadModule aspdotnet_module modules/mod_aspdotnet.so How did you compile it? This user likely didn't. Most users likely won't. To compile it, install the original VisualStudio .NET (at least the C/C++ and .NET components of the product) and simply follow the instructions in the tarball's README. Now - I realize it's almost absurd to ask people to go back to the original .NET version of VisualStudio (2002) but you have to recognize that Microsoft substantially redesigned *the language C++.NET* between 2002 and 2003, and started virtually from scratch between 2003 and 2005 Visual Studio. If this project had the wherewithal to oversee mod_aspdotnet, the next step of it's evolution was clearly identified as migrating to 2005. There is the 'light' version available of C++.NET. But it's not a trivial migration, and not worth my time or effort if the module's not hanging around (hell - I wasted too many cycles on preparing to release build 2004 and updating all of the documentation contexts as well to integrate it better into the httpd project). So, this was my basis for a 'last call' on the VisualStudio .NET 2002 flavor, with every major problem for the VS .NET/2002 builds resolved. So do what every project asks you to do, read the README in the .zip ball :) Note that it's out of date in one respect; installer (now compiled from the InstallShield 11.5 flavor) can no longer integrate into the build schema. You would get more out of reading the 'deployment notes' section of; http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/mod_aspdotnet/trunk/README.txt Since README is out-of-date with respect to "installer"; I'll whack that note. Bill
RE: [TALLY] Release mod_aspdotnet build 2004?
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2006 at 01:09:19PM +0200, Trent Nelson wrote: > > 1. Download and install latest Win32 2.2.2 Apache binary. > > o.k., well that's a bad start, but I can handle building an Apache > binary :-) Yah, I was just recalling what I did; if you want to build directly you're more than welcome :) > > 2. Download .netCHARTING 4.0 evaluation version for .NET 1.1 from > > http://www.dotnetcharting.com/download.aspx. > > They want my email address, so that's a non-starter. Are there any other > ASP applications, liberally licensed, that would serve as a good test? Yeah, it's a commercial product, so you'd be downloading the eval version. Microsoft released a whole bunch of ASP.NET 1.1 webapps you could try: http://www.asp.net/downloads/default11.aspx I recall trying the 'Issue Tracker' and 'Portal Starter Kit' but didn't actually have any luck getting them running; wasn't sure if it was a mod_aspdotnet thing or something else, though. Didn't pursue it as all the .NET webapps that I wanted to run, ran ;-) > > # ASP.NET Configuration > > LoadModule aspdotnet_module modules/mod_aspdotnet.so > > How did you compile it? I used the binary installer Bill provided. Didn't have any inclination to build it given that it needs VS .NET 2002, and the installer worked fine. > Colm MacCárthaigh Trent.
Re: [TALLY] Release mod_aspdotnet build 2004?
The Microsoft Atlast samples will be a good test aswel:http://atlas.asp.net/Default.aspx?tabid=47On 7/20/06, Colm MacCarthaigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Thu, Jul 20, 2006 at 01:09:19PM +0200, Trent Nelson wrote:> 1. Download and install latest Win32 2.2.2 Apache binary.o.k., well that's a bad start, but I can handle building an Apachebinary :-) > 2. Download .netCHARTING 4.0 evaluation version for .NET 1.1 from> http://www.dotnetcharting.com/download.aspx.They want my email address, so that's a non-starter. Are there any other ASP applications, liberally licensed, that would serve as a good test?> 3. Unzip somewhere, e.g. c:\dotnetcharting.>> 4. Edit httdp.conf and add the following:>> # ASP.NET Configuration> LoadModule aspdotnet_module modules/mod_aspdotnet.soHow did you compile it?> AddHandler asp.net asax ascx ashx asmx aspx aspxauth axd config cs > csproj \>licx rem resources resx soap vb vbproj vsdisco> webinfo>> >> AspNetVersion v1.1.4322>> AspNetMount /dotnetcharting "C:/dotnetcharting" >> Alias /dotnetcharting "C:/dotnetcharting">> > Options FollowSymlinks ExecCGI> Order allow,deny > Allow from all> DirectoryIndex Default.htm Default.aspx> >> # For all virtual ASP.NET webs, we need the aspnet_client files > # to serve the client-side helper scripts.> AliasMatch /aspnet_client/system_web/(\d+)_(\d+)_(\d+)_(\d+)/(.*) \> "C:/Windows/Microsoft.NET/Framework/v$1.$2.$3/ASP.NETClientFiles/$4" > > "C:/Windows/Microsoft.NET/Framework/v*/ASP.NETClientFiles">> Options FollowSymlinks> Order allow,deny> Allow from all > >> >> 5. Restart httpd and visit http://localhost/dotnetcharting.Cool :)--Colm MacCárthaighPublic Key: [EMAIL PROTECTED]-- ~Jorge
Re: [TALLY] Release mod_aspdotnet build 2004?
On Thu, Jul 20, 2006 at 01:09:19PM +0200, Trent Nelson wrote: > 1. Download and install latest Win32 2.2.2 Apache binary. o.k., well that's a bad start, but I can handle building an Apache binary :-) > 2. Download .netCHARTING 4.0 evaluation version for .NET 1.1 from > http://www.dotnetcharting.com/download.aspx. They want my email address, so that's a non-starter. Are there any other ASP applications, liberally licensed, that would serve as a good test? > 3. Unzip somewhere, e.g. c:\dotnetcharting. > > 4. Edit httdp.conf and add the following: > > # ASP.NET Configuration > LoadModule aspdotnet_module modules/mod_aspdotnet.so How did you compile it? > AddHandler asp.net asax ascx ashx asmx aspx aspxauth axd config cs > csproj \ >licx rem resources resx soap vb vbproj vsdisco > webinfo > > > > AspNetVersion v1.1.4322 > > AspNetMount /dotnetcharting "C:/dotnetcharting" > > Alias /dotnetcharting "C:/dotnetcharting" > > > Options FollowSymlinks ExecCGI > Order allow,deny > Allow from all > DirectoryIndex Default.htm Default.aspx > > > # For all virtual ASP.NET webs, we need the aspnet_client files > # to serve the client-side helper scripts. > AliasMatch /aspnet_client/system_web/(\d+)_(\d+)_(\d+)_(\d+)/(.*) \ > "C:/Windows/Microsoft.NET/Framework/v$1.$2.$3/ASP.NETClientFiles/$4" >"C:/Windows/Microsoft.NET/Framework/v*/ASP.NETClientFiles"> > Options FollowSymlinks > Order allow,deny > Allow from all > > > > > 5. Restart httpd and visit http://localhost/dotnetcharting. Cool :) -- Colm MacCárthaighPublic Key: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [TALLY] Release mod_aspdotnet build 2004?
Erm, missed a slightly important step. > 1. Download and install latest Win32 2.2.2 Apache binary. 1.5. Download and install mod_aspdotnet binary for Apache 2.x. > 2. Download .netCHARTING 4.0 evaluation version for .NET 1.1 from > http://www.dotnetcharting.com/download.aspx.
RE: [TALLY] Release mod_aspdotnet build 2004?
> Feel free to chip in, I'd be more than happy to vote +1 for the module > if I knew how to get it up and running and test it with even a hello > world ASP. I had a brief look, and it seemed like a lot of effort. You > could document that, and it might make it easier for testers. Here are the steps I took to get .netCHARTING working with mod_aspdotnet: 1. Download and install latest Win32 2.2.2 Apache binary. 2. Download .netCHARTING 4.0 evaluation version for .NET 1.1 from http://www.dotnetcharting.com/download.aspx. 3. Unzip somewhere, e.g. c:\dotnetcharting. 4. Edit httdp.conf and add the following: # ASP.NET Configuration LoadModule aspdotnet_module modules/mod_aspdotnet.so AddHandler asp.net asax ascx ashx asmx aspx aspxauth axd config cs csproj \ licx rem resources resx soap vb vbproj vsdisco webinfo AspNetVersion v1.1.4322 AspNetMount /dotnetcharting "C:/dotnetcharting" Alias /dotnetcharting "C:/dotnetcharting" Options FollowSymlinks ExecCGI Order allow,deny Allow from all DirectoryIndex Default.htm Default.aspx # For all virtual ASP.NET webs, we need the aspnet_client files # to serve the client-side helper scripts. AliasMatch /aspnet_client/system_web/(\d+)_(\d+)_(\d+)_(\d+)/(.*) \ "C:/Windows/Microsoft.NET/Framework/v$1.$2.$3/ASP.NETClientFiles/$4" Options FollowSymlinks Order allow,deny Allow from all 5. Restart httpd and visit http://localhost/dotnetcharting. And that's all that needs to be done. Trent.
Re: [TALLY] Release mod_aspdotnet build 2004?
WDaquell wrote: So, the whole mod is just going to die? Just because we didn't submit bugs or feature requests? Isn't there a problem with a system that assumes software is unwanted if there aren't any bugs found or features that need to be added? -1 for opensource from me... Actually that's a bit silly. You've never gotten a note from a vendor with an expiry on their support for one of their products? Never had to upgrade to get security and other serious bug fixes because the product was out of maintenance? Open Source is more than a "more expensive" vendor project, when you can pay a consultant to fix your bug, without relying on a vendor to do it. As far as the module dying; yes, it might; but I doubt it. This hasn't been posted to users@ as it's better to give with one hand as we take away with the other... and I'm looking at different options that might permit this module to persist and keep me occasionally contributing. FYI - I won't move it outside of all organizational, social and legal support frameworks into the black hole of sourceforge or similar. I'll keep you all posted Bill
Re: [TALLY] Release mod_aspdotnet build 2004?
Actually, in terms of 'IJW' examples, iBuySpy was always my reference in the old days. The more thorough reference is to plug in the entire .NET SDK sphere of example content. Seems sort of moot already :) Bill Nick Kew wrote: On Wednesday 19 July 2006 20:49, Michael Fischer wrote: And we owe you what exactly? :) Feel free to chip in, I'd be more than happy to vote +1 for the module if I knew how to get it up and running and test it with even a hello world ASP. I had a brief look, and it seemed like a lot of effort. You could document that, and it might make it easier for testers. I'd be more than willing to come up with such a document, Great! even though that still will not allow enough votes. It might, in due course. Firstly it might help other people who have a vote but are not well enough informed on this particular subject to exercise it. Secondly, it could be a step on the way to earning your very own vote. We all have to start somewhere with contributing!
Re: [TALLY] Release mod_aspdotnet build 2004?
On Wednesday 19 July 2006 20:49, Michael Fischer wrote: > > And we owe you what exactly? :) Feel free to chip in, I'd be > > more than happy to vote +1 for the module if I knew how to > > get it up and running and test it with even a hello world > > ASP. I had a brief look, and it seemed like a lot of effort. > > You could document that, and it might make it easier for testers. > > I'd be more than willing to come up with such a document, Great! > even though > that still will not allow enough votes. It might, in due course. Firstly it might help other people who have a vote but are not well enough informed on this particular subject to exercise it. Secondly, it could be a step on the way to earning your very own vote. We all have to start somewhere with contributing! -- Nick Kew
Re: [TALLY] Release mod_aspdotnet build 2004?
Well once you get the basics going its should be a breeze.Biggers tip someone gave me was:ASP.net are applications not scripts!Every folder is a unique application... hensh forth the need for the mount stuff ^ On 7/19/06, Michael Fischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> And we owe you what exactly? :) Feel free to chip in, I'd be> more than happy to vote +1 for the module if I knew how to> get it up and running and test it with even a hello world> ASP. I had a brief look, and it seemed like a lot of effort. > You could document that, and it might make it easier for testers.>I'd be more than willing to come up with such a document, even thoughthat still will not allow enough votes.Michael Fischer -- ~Jorge
RE: [TALLY] Release mod_aspdotnet build 2004?
> > And we owe you what exactly? :) Feel free to chip in, I'd be > more than happy to vote +1 for the module if I knew how to > get it up and running and test it with even a hello world > ASP. I had a brief look, and it seemed like a lot of effort. > You could document that, and it might make it easier for testers. > I'd be more than willing to come up with such a document, even though that still will not allow enough votes. Michael Fischer
Re: [TALLY] Release mod_aspdotnet build 2004?
On Wed, Jul 19, 2006 at 01:21:12PM -0400, WDaquell wrote: > So, the whole mod is just going to die? It's not like the source will cease to exist or become impossible to maintain. If no developers can be convinced to volunteer their time and effort on the maintainence part, then you can always pay someone to do it :-) > Just because we didn't submit bugs or feature requests? Isn't there a > problem with a system that assumes software is unwanted if there > aren't any bugs found or features that need to be added? -1 for > opensource from me... I guess I'll have to move on to more expensive > options. Thank you William Rowe for trying; that's more than most of > the rest can say. And we owe you what exactly? :) Feel free to chip in, I'd be more than happy to vote +1 for the module if I knew how to get it up and running and test it with even a hello world ASP. I had a brief look, and it seemed like a lot of effort. You could document that, and it might make it easier for testers. -- Colm MacCárthaighPublic Key: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [TALLY] Release mod_aspdotnet build 2004?
This is an absolute shame. I've followed the Apache project for years now, and especially mod_aspdotnet (without which the httpd server is useless to me). I've commented a few times, though as for submitting bugs I couldn't because I found none. However, I haven't been as active as I could have been because my ASP.NET programs are 2.0, which doesn't completely run on the mod. Once I submitted a list of features I'd like implemented for 2.0... couldn't implement them myself because I don't have the know-how in that area. I went through the source, but it will be awhile before I can start any active development. So, the whole mod is just going to die? Just because we didn't submit bugs or feature requests? Isn't there a problem with a system that assumes software is unwanted if there aren't any bugs found or features that need to be added? -1 for opensource from me... I guess I'll have to move on to more expensive options. Thank you William Rowe for trying; that's more than most of the rest can say. -Wraith
Re: [TALLY] Release mod_aspdotnet build 2004?
On 7/19/06, Luis Fco. Ramirez Daza Glez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: How people that just use the mod_aspnet module can contribute or vote, to make the mod_aspnet project continue? mod_aspdotnet can and is encouraged to find a home outside of the ASF. There are plenty of other places out there that will host open-source projects for free. The issues with it being here in the ASF is that we require demonstrable community oversight over the code and that wasn't happening. Therefore, the code can be imported elsewhere as long as our license terms are respected. If a fork wants to take the mod_aspdotnet name as well, we can pursue what needs to happen. -- justin
RE: [TALLY] Release mod_aspdotnet build 2004?
Hi to all I'm concernd about the mod_aspnet project. We use it a lot, even in production environments. But I know nothing about HTTP server programming, a know ASP.NET. How could we contribute to the project. We Test it, we use it, but we hardly can do anything more. So my question is: How people that just use the mod_aspnet module can contribute or vote, to make the mod_aspnet project continue? Kind regards Luis F. Ramirez > -Original Message- > From: William A. Rowe, Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 10:36 AM > To: dev@httpd.apache.org > Subject: Re: [TALLY] Release mod_aspdotnet build 2004? > > Michael Fischer wrote: > > > > I think that the problem with the mod_aspdotnet module, is that the > > people that need to use it do not think that they are in a position to > > make meaningful contributions. This is, of course, making that the > > assumption that most of the people interested in using it have > > experience in ASP.NET development, not web server development. > > It appears so, but no. Incubation has taught us that mentors (oversight) > do cast educated votes based on 1) reviewing the proposed release > 'tarball' > of the source code, that it follows the ASF policies, licensing, NOTICE, > etc etc, and 2) reviewing the process that led to the release (thus, why > we killed [EMAIL PROTECTED] and folded it into [EMAIL PROTECTED]), and 3) > reviewing > the feedback of those who -do- actually test the operations of the release. > Incubation mentors often aren't even deeply familiar with the technologies > they are mentoring, but have an interest in the technology and growing > a healthy community. We've learned through trial and error how to do this. > > Jorge Schrauwen wrote: > > This slightly worries me... > > Other modules in the early phase of incubation that looks promesing > like > > mod_ftp might end up having simular fates! > > I share your concern and hope not, too! > > > Is placing interesing modules like mod_aspdotnet, mod_ftp,... in a > > seperated project a good idea? > > Not really. The same oversight is still required. The issue is that > 1) process has to be followed, and 2) three people at its project TLP > who are PMC members have to invest the time to perform those three > steps I mentioned above. I'm disappointed two others didn't exist. > > > Maybe they live longer if there where part of the httpd-truck? > > I really doubt that is a factor - one way or another ;-) > > Steffen wrote: > > Is this the end of mod_aspdotnet ? Or it is not anymore under the ASF > > flag ? > > Either? Neither? Both? I don't know, I haven't made any final decision > regarding /my/ personal next step. The code is under the ASL, period, so > others do what they will within the scope of that license. If you toss > around that code, just remember the candidate you downloaded was not an > ASF release, please. The final 2.0.0.2000 release will be available at > archive.apache.org/dist/httpd/mod_aspdotnet/ where it's always been. > > Naming the files -snapshot-r419791 would be an accurate statement. > > > I know quite some (Win)Apacherians using mod_aspdotnet. I am wondering > > if the Vote-system is working for this kind of mods, special when it is > > related to Windows (we all know that most, pmc members?, here are > > dedicated to *nix flavors). I have no insight in the ASF vote-system, > > not sure I could vote. > > To your last point; I understand, that's why I was sure to reply to early > voters to say yes, if you test the project wants to know this. Your call > of course, if you are testing a release tarball for some project on Mac > OS/X 10.4 and five others already chimed in that it builds and runs > correctly > on that specific OS, at some point it becomes pointless to repeat that. > > Does voting work? I see it work at incubator. Perhaps those PMC members > have > a skillset or frame of mind that isn't common enough here at the httpd PMC. > No idea, but yes I hope it's resolved for other httpd efforts beyond the > core. > > > I build and running now version 2004 without issues. > > Thanks for the (belated) feedback, this is good to know :) > > Bill
Re: [TALLY] Release mod_aspdotnet build 2004?
Michael Fischer wrote: I think that the problem with the mod_aspdotnet module, is that the people that need to use it do not think that they are in a position to make meaningful contributions. This is, of course, making that the assumption that most of the people interested in using it have experience in ASP.NET development, not web server development. It appears so, but no. Incubation has taught us that mentors (oversight) do cast educated votes based on 1) reviewing the proposed release 'tarball' of the source code, that it follows the ASF policies, licensing, NOTICE, etc etc, and 2) reviewing the process that led to the release (thus, why we killed [EMAIL PROTECTED] and folded it into [EMAIL PROTECTED]), and 3) reviewing the feedback of those who -do- actually test the operations of the release. Incubation mentors often aren't even deeply familiar with the technologies they are mentoring, but have an interest in the technology and growing a healthy community. We've learned through trial and error how to do this. Jorge Schrauwen wrote: > This slightly worries me... > Other modules in the early phase of incubation that looks promesing like > mod_ftp might end up having simular fates! I share your concern and hope not, too! > Is placing interesing modules like mod_aspdotnet, mod_ftp,... in a > seperated project a good idea? Not really. The same oversight is still required. The issue is that 1) process has to be followed, and 2) three people at its project TLP who are PMC members have to invest the time to perform those three steps I mentioned above. I'm disappointed two others didn't exist. > Maybe they live longer if there where part of the httpd-truck? I really doubt that is a factor - one way or another ;-) Steffen wrote: > Is this the end of mod_aspdotnet ? Or it is not anymore under the ASF > flag ? Either? Neither? Both? I don't know, I haven't made any final decision regarding /my/ personal next step. The code is under the ASL, period, so others do what they will within the scope of that license. If you toss around that code, just remember the candidate you downloaded was not an ASF release, please. The final 2.0.0.2000 release will be available at archive.apache.org/dist/httpd/mod_aspdotnet/ where it's always been. Naming the files -snapshot-r419791 would be an accurate statement. > I know quite some (Win)Apacherians using mod_aspdotnet. I am wondering > if the Vote-system is working for this kind of mods, special when it is > related to Windows (we all know that most, pmc members?, here are > dedicated to *nix flavors). I have no insight in the ASF vote-system, > not sure I could vote. To your last point; I understand, that's why I was sure to reply to early voters to say yes, if you test the project wants to know this. Your call of course, if you are testing a release tarball for some project on Mac OS/X 10.4 and five others already chimed in that it builds and runs correctly on that specific OS, at some point it becomes pointless to repeat that. Does voting work? I see it work at incubator. Perhaps those PMC members have a skillset or frame of mind that isn't common enough here at the httpd PMC. No idea, but yes I hope it's resolved for other httpd efforts beyond the core. > I build and running now version 2004 without issues. Thanks for the (belated) feedback, this is good to know :) Bill
RE: [TALLY] Release mod_aspdotnet build 2004?
I too, joined this process late (last week when I coworker told me about the vote) and only slightly understand the voting process. From what I understand is that it takes at least 6 months of active participation for a volunteer to be able to cast binding votes. Therefore, no matter how much users vote for the work that went into release 2004 there was no way that the votes cast by Jorge, James, and Trent to be quantified as binding. I myself only had enough time to state that it works for my environment and am still in the process of testing it. I think that the problem with the mod_aspdotnet module, is that the people that need to use it do not think that they are in a position to make meaningful contributions. This is, of course, making that the assumption that most of the people interested in using it have experience in ASP.NET development, not web server development. Michael Fischer From: Steffen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 8:47 AMTo: dev@httpd.apache.orgSubject: Re: [TALLY] Release mod_aspdotnet build 2004? Is this the end of mod_aspdotnet ? Or it is not anymore under the ASF flag ? I know quite some (Win)Apacherians using mod_aspdotnet. I am wondering if the Vote-system is working for this kind of mods, special when it is related to Windows (we all know that most, pmc members?, here are dedicated to *nix flavors). I have no insight in the ASF vote-system, not sure I could vote. I build and running now version 2004 without issues. Steffen - Original Message - From: Jorge Schrauwen To: dev@httpd.apache.org Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 16:29 Subject: Re: [TALLY] Release mod_aspdotnet build 2004? This slightly worries me...Other modules in the early phase of incubation that looks promesing like mod_ftp might end up having simular fates!Is placing interesing modules like mod_aspdotnet, mod_ftp,... in a seperated project a good idea? Maybe they live longer if there where part of the httpd-truck?Jorge On 7/19/06, William A. Rowe, Jr. < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Summary; +1 binding: wrowe +1 nonbinding feedback (with qualitative data) from: Jorge SchrauwenJames Park (pencil_ethics)Trent NelsonAs none of the other pmc members care to inspect the source tarball, thevote fails. As Roy has raised concerns about httpd's ongoing ownership, even of the prior release, that too will be removed from the activewww.apache.org/dist/httpd/mod_aspdotnet location. archive.apache.org isa lovely permanent museum for that wrinkle in time (2.0.0.2000 21 Nov 2004).As 2.0.4 and the various snapshots between now and then are not releases,those have been removed from /dev/dist. It will take me a few days to find the free cycles to expunge the trunk of httpd/docs/manual/, downloads.cgi,etc and then remove /dist/httpd/mod_aspdotnet.As there is no oversight going on here, no further commits will occur tobring mod_aspdotnet to Visual Studio 2005 here. What does the list want to do with the unreleased mod_arm4 and mod_aspdotnetcode repositories? Do we want to create a /repos/asf/httpd/attic/ repositoryfor abandoned/orphaned httpd code? Or simply svn rm them, knowing they still persist at certain points in history and can be resurrected?To those disappointed, I share your disappointment, but have no regret. Thisis what it is. I have spent considerable time reviewing the history of posts to cli-dev, cli-users, and the bugtraq database. No specific individualsstand out as frequent posters of bug fixes (not that many were needed), peerto peer user feedback authors etc. Obviously one solution would be to draft the few that express an interest here and now, but the httpd project (appropriately)expects a reasonable track record to avoid exactly this sort of issue.Although this was a rather mature module from it's inception, with a very short list of issues that users wanted addressed, it certainly attracts many moreusers than developers. The net code changes since it was granted two years agoare less than 250 LoC, and developing -within- the framework has much more interest than developing the -module-, itself.I'm afraid this is no different than the passing of JRun and other similar, nowabandoned code. Developers and their technologies move on. It would be amusing if the project spent 5% of the effort that's invested in Apache 1.3 to reviewthis release, but that wasn't to be.Sadly yours,BillWilliam A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:> Build 2004 of mod_aspdotnet is prepared (after a number of abortive > attempts due to the whole 2.0/2.2 partitioning and renaming of apache.exe,> along with switching flavors of InstallShield to a
Re: [TALLY] Release mod_aspdotnet build 2004?
Is this the end of mod_aspdotnet ? Or it is not anymore under the ASF flag ? I know quite some (Win)Apacherians using mod_aspdotnet. I am wondering if the Vote-system is working for this kind of mods, special when it is related to Windows (we all know that most, pmc members?, here are dedicated to *nix flavors). I have no insight in the ASF vote-system, not sure I could vote. I build and running now version 2004 without issues. Steffen - Original Message - From: Jorge Schrauwen To: dev@httpd.apache.org Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 16:29 Subject: Re: [TALLY] Release mod_aspdotnet build 2004? This slightly worries me...Other modules in the early phase of incubation that looks promesing like mod_ftp might end up having simular fates!Is placing interesing modules like mod_aspdotnet, mod_ftp,... in a seperated project a good idea? Maybe they live longer if there where part of the httpd-truck?Jorge On 7/19/06, William A. Rowe, Jr. < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Summary; +1 binding: wrowe +1 nonbinding feedback (with qualitative data) from: Jorge SchrauwenJames Park (pencil_ethics)Trent NelsonAs none of the other pmc members care to inspect the source tarball, thevote fails. As Roy has raised concerns about httpd's ongoing ownership, even of the prior release, that too will be removed from the activewww.apache.org/dist/httpd/mod_aspdotnet location. archive.apache.org isa lovely permanent museum for that wrinkle in time (2.0.0.2000 21 Nov 2004).As 2.0.4 and the various snapshots between now and then are not releases,those have been removed from /dev/dist. It will take me a few days to find the free cycles to expunge the trunk of httpd/docs/manual/, downloads.cgi,etc and then remove /dist/httpd/mod_aspdotnet.As there is no oversight going on here, no further commits will occur tobring mod_aspdotnet to Visual Studio 2005 here. What does the list want to do with the unreleased mod_arm4 and mod_aspdotnetcode repositories? Do we want to create a /repos/asf/httpd/attic/ repositoryfor abandoned/orphaned httpd code? Or simply svn rm them, knowing they still persist at certain points in history and can be resurrected?To those disappointed, I share your disappointment, but have no regret. Thisis what it is. I have spent considerable time reviewing the history of posts to cli-dev, cli-users, and the bugtraq database. No specific individualsstand out as frequent posters of bug fixes (not that many were needed), peerto peer user feedback authors etc. Obviously one solution would be to draft the few that express an interest here and now, but the httpd project (appropriately)expects a reasonable track record to avoid exactly this sort of issue.Although this was a rather mature module from it's inception, with a very short list of issues that users wanted addressed, it certainly attracts many moreusers than developers. The net code changes since it was granted two years agoare less than 250 LoC, and developing -within- the framework has much more interest than developing the -module-, itself.I'm afraid this is no different than the passing of JRun and other similar, nowabandoned code. Developers and their technologies move on. It would be amusing if the project spent 5% of the effort that's invested in Apache 1.3 to reviewthis release, but that wasn't to be.Sadly yours,BillWilliam A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:> Build 2004 of mod_aspdotnet is prepared (after a number of abortive > attempts due to the whole 2.0/2.2 partitioning and renaming of apache.exe,> along with switching flavors of InstallShield to a version I have> installed)> and seeking voters. The update is here; >> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/mod_aspdotnet/>> Please cast your +/- 1's to release mod_aspdotnet-2.x.0.2004-source.zip> (along with associated binaries ...2.0.0.2004.msi and ...2.2.0.2004.msi, > one corresponding to 2.0.44 and later, the other to 2.2.2 and later).>> This is the last expected release on the Visual Studio .NET (al la 2002)> compiler toolchain; the next effort is porting it to VS 2005 (al la, the > one available in a free flavor). Porting breaks compatibility with the> older tools, since VS 2005's C++.NET schema is miles beyond 2002. For> example, a reference becomes a reference, not an overloaded psuedo-pointer. >> Bill>> .>-- ~Jorge
Re: [TALLY] Release mod_aspdotnet build 2004?
This slightly worries me...Other modules in the early phase of incubation that looks promesing like mod_ftp might end up having simular fates!Is placing interesing modules like mod_aspdotnet, mod_ftp,... in a seperated project a good idea? Maybe they live longer if there where part of the httpd-truck?JorgeOn 7/19/06, William A. Rowe, Jr. < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Summary; +1 binding: wrowe +1 nonbinding feedback (with qualitative data) from: Jorge SchrauwenJames Park (pencil_ethics)Trent NelsonAs none of the other pmc members care to inspect the source tarball, thevote fails. As Roy has raised concerns about httpd's ongoing ownership, even of the prior release, that too will be removed from the activewww.apache.org/dist/httpd/mod_aspdotnet location. archive.apache.org isa lovely permanent museum for that wrinkle in time (2.0.0.2000 21 Nov 2004).As 2.0.4 and the various snapshots between now and then are not releases,those have been removed from /dev/dist. It will take me a few days to find the free cycles to expunge the trunk of httpd/docs/manual/, downloads.cgi,etc and then remove /dist/httpd/mod_aspdotnet.As there is no oversight going on here, no further commits will occur tobring mod_aspdotnet to Visual Studio 2005 here. What does the list want to do with the unreleased mod_arm4 and mod_aspdotnetcode repositories? Do we want to create a /repos/asf/httpd/attic/ repositoryfor abandoned/orphaned httpd code? Or simply svn rm them, knowing they still persist at certain points in history and can be resurrected?To those disappointed, I share your disappointment, but have no regret. Thisis what it is. I have spent considerable time reviewing the history of posts to cli-dev, cli-users, and the bugtraq database. No specific individualsstand out as frequent posters of bug fixes (not that many were needed), peerto peer user feedback authors etc. Obviously one solution would be to draft the few that express an interest here and now, but the httpd project (appropriately)expects a reasonable track record to avoid exactly this sort of issue.Although this was a rather mature module from it's inception, with a very short list of issues that users wanted addressed, it certainly attracts many moreusers than developers. The net code changes since it was granted two years agoare less than 250 LoC, and developing -within- the framework has much more interest than developing the -module-, itself.I'm afraid this is no different than the passing of JRun and other similar, nowabandoned code. Developers and their technologies move on. It would be amusing if the project spent 5% of the effort that's invested in Apache 1.3 to reviewthis release, but that wasn't to be.Sadly yours,BillWilliam A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:> Build 2004 of mod_aspdotnet is prepared (after a number of abortive > attempts due to the whole 2.0/2.2 partitioning and renaming of apache.exe,> along with switching flavors of InstallShield to a version I have> installed)> and seeking voters. The update is here; >> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/mod_aspdotnet/>> Please cast your +/- 1's to release mod_aspdotnet-2.x.0.2004-source.zip> (along with associated binaries ...2.0.0.2004.msi and ...2.2.0.2004.msi, > one corresponding to 2.0.44 and later, the other to 2.2.2 and later).>> This is the last expected release on the Visual Studio .NET (al la 2002)> compiler toolchain; the next effort is porting it to VS 2005 (al la, the > one available in a free flavor). Porting breaks compatibility with the> older tools, since VS 2005's C++.NET schema is miles beyond 2002. For> example, a reference becomes a reference, not an overloaded psuedo-pointer. >> Bill>> .>-- ~Jorge
Re: [TALLY] Release mod_aspdotnet build 2004?
Summary; +1 binding: wrowe +1 nonbinding feedback (with qualitative data) from: Jorge Schrauwen James Park (pencil_ethics) Trent Nelson As none of the other pmc members care to inspect the source tarball, the vote fails. As Roy has raised concerns about httpd's ongoing ownership, even of the prior release, that too will be removed from the active www.apache.org/dist/httpd/mod_aspdotnet location. archive.apache.org is a lovely permanent museum for that wrinkle in time (2.0.0.2000 21 Nov 2004). As 2.0.4 and the various snapshots between now and then are not releases, those have been removed from /dev/dist. It will take me a few days to find the free cycles to expunge the trunk of httpd/docs/manual/, downloads.cgi, etc and then remove /dist/httpd/mod_aspdotnet. As there is no oversight going on here, no further commits will occur to bring mod_aspdotnet to Visual Studio 2005 here. What does the list want to do with the unreleased mod_arm4 and mod_aspdotnet code repositories? Do we want to create a /repos/asf/httpd/attic/ repository for abandoned/orphaned httpd code? Or simply svn rm them, knowing they still persist at certain points in history and can be resurrected? To those disappointed, I share your disappointment, but have no regret. This is what it is. I have spent considerable time reviewing the history of posts to cli-dev, cli-users, and the bugtraq database. No specific individuals stand out as frequent posters of bug fixes (not that many were needed), peer to peer user feedback authors etc. Obviously one solution would be to draft the few that express an interest here and now, but the httpd project (appropriately) expects a reasonable track record to avoid exactly this sort of issue. Although this was a rather mature module from it's inception, with a very short list of issues that users wanted addressed, it certainly attracts many more users than developers. The net code changes since it was granted two years ago are less than 250 LoC, and developing -within- the framework has much more interest than developing the -module-, itself. I'm afraid this is no different than the passing of JRun and other similar, now abandoned code. Developers and their technologies move on. It would be amusing if the project spent 5% of the effort that's invested in Apache 1.3 to review this release, but that wasn't to be. Sadly yours, Bill William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Build 2004 of mod_aspdotnet is prepared (after a number of abortive attempts due to the whole 2.0/2.2 partitioning and renaming of apache.exe, along with switching flavors of InstallShield to a version I have installed) and seeking voters. The update is here; http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/mod_aspdotnet/ Please cast your +/- 1's to release mod_aspdotnet-2.x.0.2004-source.zip (along with associated binaries ...2.0.0.2004.msi and ...2.2.0.2004.msi, one corresponding to 2.0.44 and later, the other to 2.2.2 and later). This is the last expected release on the Visual Studio .NET (al la 2002) compiler toolchain; the next effort is porting it to VS 2005 (al la, the one available in a free flavor). Porting breaks compatibility with the older tools, since VS 2005's C++.NET schema is miles beyond 2002. For example, a reference becomes a reference, not an overloaded psuedo-pointer. Bill .
