David.Comay at Sun.COM wrote: > > > Volatile isn't a great solution though. > > It also means that effectively we don't support third-party modules to > be added to the delivered Apache. That's why I think something along > the lines of Uncommitted makes sense.
I know you also favored a single version in /usr/apache2 (no layout versioning), so could you expand on your vision? If "Nevada" "ships" with Apache 2.2.x in /usr/apache2/ as Uncommitted, it means /usr/apache2/ can't be updated to an incompatible (if it turns out to be incompatible) Apache 2.4.x in the lifetime of the Nevada minor release family which might be a long time [Or, we'll go back to square one and debate whether to put it in /usr/apache2.4]. (This does assume the current release and interface taxonomies hold in and post- Nevada. I know you're involved with some of those efforts as well, so perhaps you can shed some light here that might be useful in selecting the right approach.) -- Jyri J. Virkki - jyri.virkki at sun.com - Sun Microsystems
