On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Edgar Pettijohn <ed...@pettijohn.no-ip.biz> wrote:
> "Upgrades should be about new features and new codes/syntax but the old > one should still work" > > I agree 100% > By and large, the developers who bring you Apache httpd for free are willing to maintain compatibility with a certain syntax and module API for "only" 8-10 years at a time. Some new features or architectural improvements require some degree of a fresh slate, and are reserved for the next major version where such changes have to be taken. > > > On 07/18/2014 12:31 PM, Good Guy wrote: > > On 18/07/2014 15:35, Eric Covener wrote: > >> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 10:21 AM, David Favor <da...@davidfavor.com> > > > wrote: > > >> Biggest problem is with Apache changing format of conf entries. > > > > > > What do you mean by the format? > > > > > > > I think what he is talking about is that for each upgrades, apache > > becomes non-compliance with the previous version. So if you plan to > > use the same conf file to speed up the implementation then you are > > likely to be stuck because some entries in the conf file won't work > > and throw out errors. > > > > Upgrades should be about new features and new codes/syntax but the old > > one should still work. > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@httpd.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@httpd.apache.org > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@httpd.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@httpd.apache.org > > -- Born in Roswell... married an alien... http://emptyhammock.com/ http://edjective.org/
