2010/3/3 Olivier Sannier <obo...@free.fr> > Troy Simpson wrote: > >> For base-level support, we narrowed that down to apache 2.2x. Do we >> really >> need to support all the python builds? They were a great service from D.J. >> Heap, but now that we don't have that, do we really need to ditch all >> windows builds? What we could look at is a standard base-level windows >> build that most people use. Personally, I just use a windows client, as >> do >> many users - I don't even use the apache bindings, nor do many windows >> users. We could leave specialised builds to teams who want to support >> them >> which in theory would make the job at this end much easier. >> >> > Well, I, for one, would need the Apache 2.2 bindings but I do not need the > Python bindings at all, which I suspect most users don't either. > So basic binaries with 2.2 support would be perfect for starters >
Agreed, Apache 2.2 bindings are must for me as well. Python and Ruby bindings would be nice, but our process doesn't depend on those. -- Bojan Resnik
