On Fri, Feb 25, 2005 at 04:56:43PM +, Thom May wrote:
I'm strongly opposed to doing this. I see no sign that the metux authors
have any desire to integrate metux with upstream, and I absolutely think
that the apache2 package should not contain any major components that aren't
included in
* Nick Maynard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
On Fri, Feb 25, 2005 at 04:56:43PM +, Thom May wrote:
I'm strongly opposed to doing this. I see no sign that the metux authors
have any desire to integrate metux with upstream, and I absolutely think
that the apache2 package should not contain
On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 04:07:16PM +, Thom May wrote:
They should send useful patches to the dev list (both apr and httpd), make
their build system and
everything that they do absolutely compatible with the upstream way of doing
it (last I looked, metux required automake to build, which
On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 04:07:16PM +, Thom May wrote:
They should send useful patches to the dev list (both apr and httpd), make
their build system and
everything that they do absolutely compatible with the upstream way of doing
it (last I looked, metux required automake to build, which
Hello Adam,
I noticed you were the most recently active maintainer of the unstable
Apache2 packages, and thought you may be interested in this.
This patch addresses Debian unstable Apache2 wishlist bug #268252:
#268252: apache2: please provide mpm_metux
The enclosed patch applies cleanly to the
* Nick Maynard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
What are your thoughts on integrating this functionality into the main
unstable/experimental tree?
Thank you,
I'm strongly opposed to doing this. I see no sign that the metux authors
have any desire to integrate metux with upstream, and I
6 matches
Mail list logo
