I felt that for a moment too, then I read up online and saw Stas and
the other core developers thoughts as Perrin highlighted below. I'm
sure there could have been a million and one ways to delay the
change... but they had a real imperative to do it as RC5.
Not to mention -- I'm really glad th
Jie Gao wrote:
I think we all knew this. But rc4 was about the last one before formal release,
and Stas promised since rc2 or something that there would be no API change (I'm
not blaming him on this though).
Yes, please don't blame Stas for this. None of us wanted to make this
change, and Stas wa
Jie Gao wrote:
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005, Carl Johnstone wrote:
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 11:02:48 +0100
From: Carl Johnstone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: modperl@perl.apache.org
Subject: Re: RC5 really broke some stuff
People like Jonathan and myself just have to double up (or triple-up!)
because
>>If you're going to run beta or pre-release code - you've got to accept the
>>risks that go with that.
>
> I think we all knew this. But rc4 was about the last one before formal
> release,
> and Stas promised since rc2 or something that there would be no API change
> (I'm
> not blaming him on t
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005, Carl Johnstone wrote:
> Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 11:02:48 +0100
> From: Carl Johnstone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: modperl@perl.apache.org
> Subject: Re: RC5 really broke some stuff
>
>
> > People like Jonathan and myself just have to double up
People like Jonathan and myself just have to double up (or triple-up!)
because of the change. Try telling that to your bosses that the latest
version of modperl is holding things back ('told you we should've used
Java!').
Did your boss know that the "latest" version of mod_perl is actually a
pr
Tom Schindl wrote:
Not right. You could use the multienv-branch of libapreq.
Tom
Not true. Trunk was moved to a dead branch and this branch was moved to
trunk in its place. You should use trunk. The multienv-branch nolonger
exists.
This happened Monday evenging.
libapreq2(trunk) + mp2 RC5 is t
jonathan vanasco wrote:
Its pretty well documented everywhere -- including the announcement
and install instructions
libapreq does not work right yet. if you're dealing with production
or stability sensitive stuff, i'd suggest keeping a copy of RC4
running and development on that release, the
Eeep... I missed it entirely. :)
Adam K
Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
Adam Kennedy wrote:
It sounds like the appropriate time for some enterprising young
developer to grab a copy of PPI and write an mp2_rename tool, to do a
first pass of what you describe below automatically.
http://people.apache.
Adam Kennedy wrote:
It sounds like the appropriate time for some enterprising young
developer to grab a copy of PPI and write an mp2_rename tool, to do a
first pass of what you describe below automatically.
http://people.apache.org/~geoff/fixme
Hi Adam, did you even look at this link. He's al
It sounds like the appropriate time for some enterprising young
developer to grab a copy of PPI and write an mp2_rename tool, to do a
first pass of what you describe below automatically.
Anyone?
Adam K
Geoffrey Young wrote:
it sucks, completely. i can't get my stuff to work under rc5
I feel f
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Geoffrey Young writes:
>the changes required to move your codebase from rc4 to rc5 should be really,
>really minimal:
For the record and for what its worth, Apache::DBILogin and
Apache::AuthenURL have been updated for RC5.
If someone wants to volunteer to take Apac
On Apr 21, 2005, at 2:17 AM, Foo Ji-Haw wrote:
People like Jonathan and myself just have to double up (or triple-up!)
because of the change. Try telling that to your bosses that the latest
version of modperl is holding things back ('told you we should've used
Java!').
On Apr 21, 2005, at 1:14 A
> it sucks, completely. i can't get my stuff to work under rc5
I feel for you, but I really don't understand this at all.
the changes required to move your codebase from rc4 to rc5 should be really,
really minimal:
- Apache2.pm doesn't exist any more, so remove it
- every Apache:: module
Foo Ji-Haw wrote:
5.9.3? Isn't the next official Perl version 5.10?
Yes, this is unofficial bleedperl gotten via rsync.
5.8.6 will support the same configuration.
I've not tried 5.6.2 yet
--
END
--
Philip M. Gollucci ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 301.25
5.9.3? Isn't the next official Perl version 5.10?
Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
It would be nice if some of the users who were so vocal about
demanding this change a few months ago would help with the patching
fun, or at least help explain to people like Jonathan and Ji-Haw why
it needed to happen.
It would be nice if some of the users who were so vocal about demanding
this change a few months ago would help with the patching fun, or at
least help explain to people like Jonathan and Ji-Haw why it needed to
happen.
- Perrin
Actually, I'd say that the developement is moving unimaginably fas
Thanks Perrin,
I will just like to say that this is a point in time when modperl 2
developers are feeling pain right now. Documentation is good, and
response on the mailing list is good. Things can always be better of course.
People like Jonathan and myself just have to double up (or triple-up!)
I don't know the full story, but I am pretty sure that the movers and
shakers in the decision team have a strong point for it (possibly
documented in perl.apache.org). It's caused me unexpected pain recently
as well; and I have to spend today as well working through my codes
because of it. But
jonathan vanasco wrote:
it sucks, completely. i can't get my stuff to work under rc5 , and I'm
way behind schedule on my work, so i can't help with porting modules to
rc5 . if you have spare time, you can set up an rc5 server and join in
the patching fun.
It would be nice if some of the user
On Apr 21, 2005, at 12:10 AM, Michael J Schout wrote:
http://perl.apache.org/dist/
you will also need to use perl modules for mod_perl that were released
before rc5 -- as many are in the process of being ported over.
the modules you use will be a mix of current-version modules and their
immedia
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Foo Ji-Haw wrote:
> Where can one download pre-RC5 copies of mod_perl? It's
> not on theoryx5 anymore.
There's an older ppm package at
http://perl.apache.org/dist/win32-bin/ppms/
However, I'll be replacing that version soonish with RC5, as
these release candidates contain f
Foo Ji-Haw wrote:
Where can one download pre-RC5 copies of mod_perl?
You can still get RC4 from
http://perl.apache.org/dist/
Regards,
Michael Schout
Where can one download pre-RC5 copies of mod_perl? It's not on theoryx5
anymore.
jonathan vanasco wrote:
Its pretty well documented everywhere -- including the announcement
and install instructions
libapreq does not work right yet. if you're dealing with production
or stability sensitive stu
Its pretty well documented everywhere -- including the announcement
and install instructions
libapreq does not work right yet. if you're dealing with production or
stability sensitive stuff, i'd suggest keeping a copy of RC4 running
and development on that release, then reading the migration
It looks like the latest release of MP2 RC5 has been giving new installs
code breaks.
I don't know the full story, but I am pretty sure that the movers and
shakers in the decision team have a strong point for it (possibly
documented in perl.apache.org). It's caused me unexpected pain recently
26 matches
Mail list logo
