You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Guy Ferraiolo <gu...@cnet.com> on 2008/02/22 19:57:05 UTC
more importuning about the flood patch
Folks
I think flood is highly useful once the random substitution feature is
added. If we got that into the code base there might be greater use of
flood and I think that would be a good thing. Also, I have some other
features planned but I don't want to have several patches outstanding at
once.
If no one cares about this how about just putting it in? I've been
working with flood for some time and I do care. Is there anything I can
do to get this going?
Thanks,
Guy
--
Guy Ferraiolo mailto:guyf@CNET.com
Performance Measurement & Analysis http://CNET.com
CNET tel: 1.908.541.3739
1200 Route 22 East fax: 1.908.575.7474
Bridgewater, NJ 08807 cel: 1.732.618.0250
Re: more importuning about the flood patch
Posted by Guy Ferraiolo <gu...@cnet.com>.
No problem!
On Fri, 2008-02-22 at 12:59 -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Guy Ferraiolo wrote:
> > Folks
> >
> > I think flood is highly useful once the random substitution feature is
> > added. If we got that into the code base there might be greater use of
> > flood and I think that would be a good thing. Also, I have some other
> > features planned but I don't want to have several patches outstanding at
> > once.
> >
> > If no one cares about this how about just putting it in? I've been
> > working with flood for some time and I do care. Is there anything I can
> > do to get this going?
>
> I like the thought, but a pointer back to your patch, please?
--
Guy Ferraiolo mailto:guyf@CNET.com
Performance Measurement & Analysis http://CNET.com
CNET tel: 1.908.541.3739
1200 Route 22 East fax: 1.908.575.7474
Bridgewater, NJ 08807 cel: 1.732.618.0250
Re: more importuning about the flood patch
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Guy Ferraiolo wrote:
> Folks
>
> I think flood is highly useful once the random substitution feature is
> added. If we got that into the code base there might be greater use of
> flood and I think that would be a good thing. Also, I have some other
> features planned but I don't want to have several patches outstanding at
> once.
>
> If no one cares about this how about just putting it in? I've been
> working with flood for some time and I do care. Is there anything I can
> do to get this going?
I like the thought, but a pointer back to your patch, please?