Longer response here. So I'm happy to be another active PMC member still involved. As someone with a growing family, my time is limited, but not too much to review and lend a +1 or feedback. I think that may be the case for a few of the folks on this list. I'd like to see Steve Hay lead the future of mod_perl project as I know a lot of the old guard have personal duties now that take precedence.
mod_perl is not a new Apache project. It's approaching two decades, close to the age of the Apache httpd project itself. It was a core driver in developing my career in software, as well as many key professional relationships associated there. I remember a *lot* of weekends early in my career hacking on mod_perl for *fun* - the coding was the reward, as well as the community feedback. There are still many shops out there using mod_perl, but not much new development, which makes sense. The project is in maintenance mode, and there are developers willing to support needed releases as Adam mentioned. If you are developing a new project, you should not use mod_perl. But if you are maintaining legacy mod_perl infrastructure, we will not leave you behind. The open source project model has changed significantly, especially over the last ten years. IMHO, while the ASF model was instrumental in the rise of open source projects into commercial environments, more recent approaches such as those supported by the Linux Foundation (which is *definitely* more commercially supported, and reflected by the platitude of industry sponsors and resources) have achieved greater growth levels in the short term. Will they still be here in 20 years? No idea. A takeaway from my reflections there is that the ASF can benefit from a bit less formality in structure to keep up with the new kids on the block. I'm just a mostly inactive PMC member, but I think it's clear that the project rules are preventing us keeping up with the needed leadership changes. On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 8:02 PM Fred Moyer <f...@redhotpenguin.com> wrote: > > Happy to continue being a maintainer. Longer response coming soon :) > > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 7:39 PM Adam Prime <adam.pr...@utoronto.ca> wrote: >> >> I think if you want to discuss alternatives, then a new thread would be >> the place to do that. >> >> With regards to plug being pulled, I think that it is up to the >> community if, when, and how that happens. That's what the point of this >> thread is. If there aren't people that are committed enough to the >> project for whatever reason to step up and keep it from going to the >> attic, then that's what will happen. >> >> Adam >> >> >> >> On 3/17/2021 9:50 PM, Jim Albert wrote: >> > Not that I want to be the guy that says it sounds like we'll be pulling >> > the mod_perl plug at any time the right scenario arises, but is it >> > reasonable to have a discussion here on mod_perl alternatives inline >> > with the various means of using mod_perl from the low level means of >> > interfacing with the Apache server to the quick and dirty stuff >> > (ModPerl::PerlRun, I believe to keep Perl and modules in memory). >> > >> > For those drawing the same conclusions from this thread as me, I've seen >> > mod_fcgid proposed as an alternative, but I haven't yet played with it. >> > Anyone with similar thoughts would ideally be looking for something that >> > doesn't require months of redeveloping to a proposed replacement to >> > mod_perl. >> > >> > I like mod_perl and it does a good job for what I use it for, but if we >> > have no one developing, it sounds like we're waiting for the catalyst to >> > come along that puts and end to it. EG.. some future Apache >> > incompatibility. I'd really like someone with mod_perl authority to >> > tell me I'm wrong, but my take on Adam's reply pretty much leaves me >> > with that conclusion. I don't see another way to draw a better conclusion. >> > >> > Jim >> >
