Quoting Alexandre Rossi (2024-08-21 09:09:34) > Now the question is, is this useful in the Debian archive? > > Remember, there are 3 available apache2 modules for the uwsgi protocol: > - mod-proxy-uwsgi (built from src:apache2, popcon?, I use it) > - mod-uwsgi (built from src:uwsgi, popcon 101) > - mod-ruwsgi (built from src:uwsgi popcon 7)
Popcon is at most 1897 (the score of uwsgi-core), i.e. a conservative score for these alternatives of more than %5 of the preferred one. That seems a significant number to me. > I do not see any reason to use anything other than mod-proxy-uwsgi. > > So my take on this is: > 1) disable apache2 building in src:uwsgi > 2) if someone complains, introduce this package in the archive > > The alternative is to not wait for someone to complain. Regardless of the userbase being arguably significant, I am ok with the approach of trying to pull the plug on them, having a package ready if someone provides good reasons for reviving them. Will you try prepare dropping these alternatives? I imagine that in addition to removal of the code and the entries in the control file (see my related draft commit in the wip branch), it requires adding an entry in debian/NEWS. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ * Sponsorship: https://ko-fi.com/drjones [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: signature
