OpenSource being what it is (e.g.: "get your finger out"), it seems to me like we will get stable Apache 2 support when someone knowledgeable in the Apache 2 guts sits down and does the work.
We don't have any resident Apache 2 experts (e.g.: we've established that 1.3 works fine for us in our busy professional lives), and the two Apache guys that offered to do the work haven't been around lately (fair play; everyone has plenty of other things to do with their free time). If a senior/knowledgeable Apache guy wants to moan about FUD, perhaps he could divert his efforts into making it work, rather than contributing to bad-vibe-slime (queue walking Statue of Liberty and feel-good music). --Wez. PS: that last paragraph is supposed to be funny, not bitchy. On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 20:19:15 -0500, George Schlossnagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Dec 20, 2004, at 8:05 PM, Christian Schneider wrote: > > > Derick Rethans wrote: > >> Why would we (as PHP developers) invest time in something while the > >> current version provides us with all we need? > > > > Because more and more people want to run Apache 2 for different > > reasons? > > > > According to your argument PHP would only need to support one single > > OS and Webserver because "it provides all we need". > > > > At some point you'll have to face it: Apache 2 is becoming a popular > > "platform". It's obviously up to you at what point you'll consider > > this important enough to spend time on it but a reality check every so > > often is never a bad thing. > > Not to sound overly American, but isn't this the sort of thing that's > just worked out by market forces? When enough people want the apache2 > sapi to be production quality, then eventually someone will become > interested enough to do the work. -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
