You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@Golux.Com> on 2000/06/06 13:04:15 UTC
[Fwd: Got news about the 1.0.0 release ?]
Is this something we should consider?
--
#ken P-)}
Ken Coar <http://Golux.Com/coar/>
Apache Software Foundation <http://www.apache.org/>
"Apache Server for Dummies" <http://Apache-Server.Com/>
"Apache Server Unleashed" <http://ApacheUnleashed.Com/>
RE: [Fwd: Got news about the 1.0.0 release ?]
Posted by "Daniel S. Reichenbach" <ds...@opensa.org>.
> Eh? They have installers all over the place on the site.
>
> Maybe I wasn't clear enough -- I meant they provide the install
> software
Might be my bad english :-) But i got the point...
/me
--
Open Server Architecture project http://www.opensa.org/
Daniel S. Reichenbach dsr@opensa.org
RE: [Fwd: Got news about the 1.0.0 release ?]
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org>.
On Tue, 6 Jun 2000, Daniel S. Reichenbach wrote:
> > Wise Solutions (www.wisesolutions.com) provides the installer for
> > Python.
> Couldn`t find it on the site, do you have a link to it?
Eh? They have installers all over the place on the site.
Maybe I wasn't clear enough -- I meant they provide the install software
which Python builds their install bundle from. The actual Python distro is
at www.python.org.
Cheers,
-g
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
RE: [Fwd: Got news about the 1.0.0 release ?]
Posted by "Daniel S. Reichenbach" <ds...@opensa.org>.
> Wise Solutions (www.wisesolutions.com) provides the installer for
> Python.
Couldn`t find it on the site, do you have a link to it?
/me
--
Open Server Architecture project http://www.opensa.org/
Daniel S. Reichenbach dsr@opensa.org
RE: [Fwd: Got news about the 1.0.0 release ?]
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org>.
Wise Solutions (www.wisesolutions.com) provides the installer for Python.
Several years ago, they gave the Python community several licenses to use
the product (and shipped boxes? dunno).
In any case, they seem supportive of free software and are quite happy to
provide a license to use the product. In the Python case, it was quite
clear cut: there was just one guy who created the Win32 distro. That might
not make as much sense as for Apache, so we may want stuff that is free to
start with.
Cheers,
-g
On Tue, 6 Jun 2000, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> It would be nice to consider a free software installer
> package, open source would be still nicer.
>
> I was about ready to roll something vanilla out of what
> Win32 already does. Anyone have a lead before I attack?
>
> (Yes, there is a 'free' version of installshield, but we
> need to run some fixup code somewhere in the process.
> This will be simplified in 2.0, since after installation,
> the program will simply run the command:
> Apache -k install -s manual
> With a new option to identify if the service starts up
> only manually, automatic, or is disabled entirely.)
>
> Bill
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Rodent of Unusual Size [mailto:Ken.Coar@Golux.Com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 6:04 AM
> > To: Apache Developers
> > Subject: [Fwd: Got news about the 1.0.0 release ?]
> >
> >
> > Is this something we should consider?
> > --
> > #ken P-)}
> >
> > Ken Coar <http://Golux.Com/coar/>
> > Apache Software Foundation <http://www.apache.org/>
> > "Apache Server for Dummies" <http://Apache-Server.Com/>
> > "Apache Server Unleashed" <http://ApacheUnleashed.Com/>
>
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Installer for Win32 (was: RE: [Fwd: Got news about the 1.0.0 release ?])
Posted by "Daniel S. Reichenbach" <ds...@opensa.org>.
I just digged into the documentation of the MSI to check possible
solutions for getting it running in a usable form, which at least
is as good as the previous Installshield version :-) The important
point is parsing the config files.
MSI allows us to do this in several ways:
o patch the config files using custom actions and VBScript.
Alternatives are VBScript and PerlScript.
This would require the end-users to have the Windows
Scripting Host installed.
In the eye of the ILOVEYOU storm a risky thing to do.
o update the install.dll for MSI to do patching. Would offer
a good way to make the installation more comfortable with
options like installation-dependant configuration.
A bit more work, as i would have to port my parser from
installshield to c, but it would be worth it.
Thats it for now. More on this in the next days.
/me
--
Open Server Architecture project http://www.opensa.org/
Daniel S. Reichenbach dsr@opensa.org
RE: [Fwd: Got news about the 1.0.0 release ?]
Posted by "Daniel S. Reichenbach" <ds...@opensa.org>.
> > So i see no problem in using MSI, as the advertisement doesn`t
> > seem to make any sense for Apache. As using the standard inf files
> > for installations is not as comfortable for the user, i would
> > suggest to give MSI a try.
>
> Your call, voulenteer! I'm happy to give anything based on a decent
> free or opensource (preferably the later) a whirl! As long as MSI
> won't pop up extreme "You must download IEx now... click here to
> continue" I'm ok with it.
Ok then. I`ll start with porting my current installshield script
over to the MSI in the next days. As i didn`t work with MSI yet,
i`m not sure what amount of time it will require.
If anyone has wishes what should be covered by the setup, send it
to the list.
/me
--
Open Server Architecture project http://www.opensa.org/
Daniel S. Reichenbach dsr@opensa.org
RE: [Fwd: Got news about the 1.0.0 release ?]
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@lnd.com>.
> From: Daniel S. Reichenbach [mailto:dsr@opensa.org]
> Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2000 10:05 AM
>
> > Clarifications... I was not considering the MSI installer as vanilla
> > (now that I see which page you were pointing to :) If I read it
> > right, it 'requires' an MS IE to run (?!?)
>
> I just checked the current 1.1 release of MSI. The requirements
> are not that bad. You can use any Win9x version, NT4 with SP3
> and Win2k. The MS IE is only required for the so called "Avertising
> function". The advertisement function allows the admin to pre-
> select applications for users. All entries in the startmenu appear
> as if the application is installed, but it isn`t. When the users
> clicks on any entry the application gets installed.
It sounded extreme, glad it isn't (that) bad :)
> So i see no problem in using MSI, as the advertisement doesn`t seem
> to make any sense for Apache. As using the standard inf files for
> installations is not as comfortable for the user, i would suggest
> to give MSI a try.
Your call, voulenteer! I'm happy to give anything based on a decent
free or opensource (preferably the later) a whirl! As long as MSI
won't pop up extreme "You must download IEx now... click here to
continue" I'm ok with it.
Bill
RE: [Fwd: Got news about the 1.0.0 release ?]
Posted by "Daniel S. Reichenbach" <ds...@opensa.org>.
> Clarifications... I was not considering the MSI installer as vanilla
> (now that I see which page you were pointing to :) If I read it
> right, it 'requires' an MS IE to run (?!?)
I just checked the current 1.1 release of MSI. The requirements
are not that bad. You can use any Win9x version, NT4 with SP3
and Win2k. The MS IE is only required for the so called "Avertising
function". The advertisement function allows the admin to pre-
select applications for users. All entries in the startmenu appear
as if the application is installed, but it isn`t. When the users
clicks on any entry the application gets installed.
So i see no problem in using MSI, as the advertisement doesn`t seem
to make any sense for Apache. As using the standard inf files for
installations is not as comfortable for the user, i would suggest
to give MSI a try.
/me
--
Open Server Architecture project http://www.opensa.org/
Daniel S. Reichenbach dsr@opensa.org
RE: [Fwd: Got news about the 1.0.0 release ?]
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@lnd.com>.
> From: Daniel S. Reichenbach [mailto:dsr@opensa.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2000 12:37 AM
>
> > > My scripts check the httpd.conf and offer patching it, depending
> > > on the previous contents, e.g. modules can be configured with
> > > an update.
> >
> > It all sounds good... I just verified that nothing else was pulled
> > into the release dependencies but msvcrt.dll...
> >
> > Do you think we could be in a position to use your new installer/
> > install scripts late this week or sometime next? I'd like to see
> > us make a fast break, and we have a good number of Apache/Win32
> > testers on hand at this moment. Unless someone raises their hand
> > to roll the old script (I don't have that specific version of
> > InstallSheild myself.)
>
> I would say, i could have all ready until friday/saturday. I have
> to finish some updates, which are needed for IS 2000 and then
> it should be ready to go.
Clarifications... I was not considering the MSI installer as vanilla
(now that I see which page you were pointing to :) If I read it right,
it 'requires' an MS IE to run (?!?)
I was considering the most basic .inf/.cab solution available, if it
could be done. Since you voulenteer, I'm being patient :) Have 'nuf
other things to be working on anyway.
Let us know how your plate is freeing up to kick some stuff around,
and please don't feel that we -have- to use the existing installdll,
if there is a better way please don't get hung up on that. It only
exists to set up the @@ServerRoot@@. But I'd love to see where you
are thinking of taking this...
I'm getting some thoughts on 2.0 (dangerous things... those thoughts...)
that we could do some parsing of the httpd.conf and look for blatently
missing new directives from version to version, and prompt the user
if they wish to add the XXX directive. If it's in the .conf but
commented out, we can safely ignore it. But back to 1.3.13...
-------------
Ken has made two requests, on top of it. One is to prompt the user
on day 1 for their hostname, I don't know if I like this or not.
The second request is to hold the console open on error. There is only
one dirt simple stupid way to do this, and I'm leaning this way.
Right now our icons include:
"Apache Web Server Documentation"
-> "@@ServerRoot@@\htdocs\manual\index.html"
"Install Apache as a service"
-> "@@ServerRoot@@\Apache.exe" -d "@@ServerRoot@@" -i
"Start Apache"
-> "@@ServerRoot@@\Apache.exe" -d "@@ServerRoot@@" -s [should be -k start !]
"Stop Apache"
-> "@@ServerRoot@@\Apache.exe" -d "@@ServerRoot@@" -k shutdown
"Uninstall Apache Service"
-> "@@ServerRoot@@\Apache.exe" -d "@@ServerRoot@@" -u
All well and good... but one is led to believe that Start/Stop
Apache then start and stop a service... misleading.
Those should change to Start|Stop Apache in a Console Window
Uninstall Apache Service is equally misleading, since the average
user expect Apache to be uninstalled.
Better, perhaps;
"Install Apache to start at bootup"
"Remove Apache from list to start at bootup"
Ick... awful phrases, but that's the drift. Then we offer the
typical "Uninstall the Apache Server" if the setup program supports
it, although we will have to query the SCM and delete all services
matching ["]@@ServerRoot@@\Apache.exe["] Under Win98, that means
iterating the HKLM\Software\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunServices key,
find each value of ["]@@ServerRoot@@\Apache.exe["], walk that value
name back to the HKLM\System\Services\CurrentControlSet tree and
blast each such named key. I'll write out that code if you give
me the installer interface semantics.
If we uninstall, of course, we must never blast things like httpd.conf
and their changes to the htdocs folder (we could prompt if they want
to delete the logs and proxy folders.)
And I'd like to see a new
"Restart Apache" [a new option :]
-> "@@ServerRoot@@\Apache.exe" -d "@@ServerRoot@@" -k restart
and
"Edit Apache Server Configuration"
-> "Notepad.exe "@@ServerRoot@@"\conf\httpd.conf"
"View Apache Server Error Log"
-> "Notepad.exe "@@ServerRoot@@"\logs\error.log"
"View Apache Server Access Log"
-> "Notepad.exe "@@ServerRoot@@"\logs\access.log"
Notepad is friendly, you can open the already open log file
while the server is running (at least on NT 4... I'll check
in with Win95.) The QuickViewer will -not-, nor will WordPad
(which sucks, since NotePad defers large log files to WordPad!)
Damn... might as well find us a friggin text file viewer that
drops the user on the last line of any already open file.
command /k more <error.log would work, I suppose. I give up,
someone else offer an idea here :-|
Plus the docs are broken, so I'd also like to see instead:
"Apache Web Server Documentation (on the Web)"
-> "http://www.apache.org/docs/index.html"
"Apache Web Server Documentation (on this Server)"
-> "http://127.0.0.1/manual/index.html"
(File based docs are pretty cruddy, no wonder Win32 folks never see
the FAQ, there is no faq if you go for the raw file :-|
-------------
That's the gist. But the bigger issue, Ken's request to hold the
console open... here's my thought:
The batch file RunApache.bat would contain the following:
@echo off
Rem - RunApache.bat: Apache httpd Server Batch Script
Rem -
Rem - You don't need this, but it keeps your console window open
Rem - if you encounter a configuration error!
Rem -
Rem - You must invoke this batch file with %comspec% /k RunApache args
Rem - so the command shell 'k'eeps running when the batch file exits.
Rem -
@@ServerRootDriveLetter@@:
cd @@ServerRoot@@
echo Starting Apache with the command:
echo.
echo Apache %*
echo.
Apache %*
if exist logs/httpd.pid goto baddeath
if errorlevel 1 goto holdopen
exit
:baddeath
echo.
echo Warning: Apache did -not- shut down gracefully.
:holdopen
echo.
echo Please review any messages above for errors, or check your error log
echo right now with this command: type logs\error.log
Now set up all the above icons to run the bat file instead of
apache.exe directly - and be sure to use Apache.exe as the 'icon file'.
We should be rocking... anyone annoyed can undo or kill the icons,
but better yet, most of us who would get annoyed runs a command window
anyway and -never- look at the icons (no wonder they are neglected :)
The syntax to launch the batch-file version is:
%comspec% /k ""@@ServerRoot@@\RunApache.bat" otherargs"
Turns out, I believe, the whole command must be quoted to quote the args.
And that, then, should do it!
Comments anyone?
Bill
RE: [Fwd: Got news about the 1.0.0 release ?]
Posted by "Daniel S. Reichenbach" <ds...@opensa.org>.
> > My scripts check the httpd.conf and offer patching it, depending
> > on the previous contents, e.g. modules can be configured with
> > an update.
>
> It all sounds good... I just verified that nothing else was pulled
> into the release dependencies but msvcrt.dll...
>
> Do you think we could be in a position to use your new installer/
> install scripts late this week or sometime next? I'd like to see
> us make a fast break, and we have a good number of Apache/Win32
> testers on hand at this moment. Unless someone raises their hand
> to roll the old script (I don't have that specific version of
> InstallSheild myself.)
I would say, i could have all ready until friday/saturday. I have
to finish some updates, which are needed for IS 2000 and then
it should be ready to go.
/me
--
Open Server Architecture project http://www.opensa.org/
Daniel S. Reichenbach dsr@opensa.org
RE: [Fwd: Got news about the 1.0.0 release ?]
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@lnd.com>.
> From: Daniel S. Reichenbach [mailto:dsr@opensa.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 4:52 PM
>
> > Feel free to build upon it. Remember that we need msvcrt.dll
> > into the system directory for release builds, but never want to
> > overwrite a newer version. Also, we never overwrite existing
> > httpd.conf or the other config files! (But we do replace the
> > httpd.conf-dist-win version.)
> My scripts check the httpd.conf and offer patching it, depending
> on the previous contents, e.g. modules can be configured with
> an update.
It all sounds good... I just verified that nothing else was pulled
into the release dependencies but msvcrt.dll...
Do you think we could be in a position to use your new installer/
install scripts late this week or sometime next? I'd like to see
us make a fast break, and we have a good number of Apache/Win32
testers on hand at this moment. Unless someone raises their hand
to roll the old script (I don't have that specific version of
InstallSheild myself.)
RE: [Fwd: Got news about the 1.0.0 release ?]
Posted by "Daniel S. Reichenbach" <ds...@opensa.org>.
> > Visual Studio installer can be found here:
> > http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/downloads/vsi/default.asp
>
> If we can avoid adding -more- dependencies upon the msvc
> platform, let's do so.
Good point... and after checking the installer, i found
another problem with VSI: it`s not a real Windows Installer
system, it just mimics to be one and makes customization
a bit hard to understand. Should be avoided, as many Win32
users of Apache never seen a compiler or dont even know
Visual C++, at least the most who contacted me for the
OpenSA releases had that problem. There were questions
like "Do i have to learn C? I`m just a sysadmin, not a
developer" . Like that. I think, this is point, where
Win32 and Unix are two different galaxies ;-)
> > The original Windows Installer can be found here:
> > http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/sdks/platform/wininst.asp
>
> That's what I was considering as 'vanilla'. Everyone has the
> original Windows Installer rolled into their Windows system
> (or we could insist on the new, more robust installer, but that's
> an option I'd like to avoid just for the size of the download.)
Maybee a link to the Installer should help. Or a seperate
download option. It`s not that big to download and its a one-time
thing if you dont have Win2k.
> > > I was about ready to roll something vanilla out of what
> > > Win32 already does. Anyone have a lead before I attack?
> > I would really love to help in that case, e.g i could
> > build the install packages or contrib my installshield
> > scripts and stuff i did for OpenSA.
>
> If you will contribute it under the Apache license, we would
> be much obliged :-)
Of course i will, i`ll have to do some rewriteing for plain
Apache, as my scripts don`t use the installdll way, they
do patching and parsing from within ther installation system,
my Win2k installer won`t need any external dll.
> Feel free to build upon it. Remember that we need msvcrt.dll
> into the system directory for release builds, but never want to
> overwrite a newer version. Also, we never overwrite existing
> httpd.conf or the other config files! (But we do replace the
> httpd.conf-dist-win version.)
My scripts check the httpd.conf and offer patching it, depending
on the previous contents, e.g. modules can be configured with
an update.
> A thought for 2.0:
>
> wouldn't it be cool if the apache installer would warn of missing,
> depreciated and invalid tags in the httpd.conf, and offered to
> clean them up (tag for tag, not just wipe the file)?
I have a parser ready for InstallShield 2000, which i wrote for
the OpenSA releases, which should be able to do this. Its currently
under testing, but if i get it stable enough and get it working
with the plain Win2k installer, it could be a way to do this.
The script also allows enabling/disabling of config tags.
/me
--
Open Server Architecture project http://www.opensa.org/
Daniel S. Reichenbach dsr@opensa.org
RE: [Fwd: Got news about the 1.0.0 release ?]
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@lnd.com>.
> From: Daniel S. Reichenbach [mailto:dsr@opensa.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 11:51 AM
>
> > It would be nice to consider a free software installer
> > package, open source would be still nicer.
> Maybee the Windows Installer in it`s plain form from M$
> or the Visual Studio Installer would be of use as a free
> alternative.
>
> Visual Studio installer can be found here:
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/downloads/vsi/default.asp
If we can avoid adding -more- dependencies upon the msvc
platform, let's do so.
> The original Windows Installer can be found here:
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/sdks/platform/wininst.asp
That's what I was considering as 'vanilla'. Everyone has the
original Windows Installer rolled into their Windows system
(or we could insist on the new, more robust installer, but that's
an option I'd like to avoid just for the size of the download.)
> > I was about ready to roll something vanilla out of what
> > Win32 already does. Anyone have a lead before I attack?
> I would really love to help in that case, e.g i could
> build the install packages or contrib my installshield
> scripts and stuff i did for OpenSA.
If you will contribute it under the Apache license, we would
be much obliged :-)
We have the installer rewrite script (@@ServerRoot@@->real root) in:
src/os/win32/installer/installdll
Feel free to build upon it. Remember that we need msvcrt.dll
into the system directory for release builds, but never want to
overwrite a newer version. Also, we never overwrite existing
httpd.conf or the other config files! (But we do replace the
httpd.conf-dist-win version.)
Bill
A thought for 2.0:
wouldn't it be cool if the apache installer would warn of missing,
depreciated and invalid tags in the httpd.conf, and offered to
clean them up (tag for tag, not just wipe the file)?
Re: [Fwd: Got news about the 1.0.0 release ?]
Posted by Scott Sanders <sc...@eionline.com>.
It is a shareware developer edition, that was OKed for use within the ASF.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel S. Reichenbach" <ds...@opensa.org>
To: <ne...@apache.org>; <sc...@eionline.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 2:39 PM
Subject: RE: [Fwd: Got news about the 1.0.0 release ?]
> > jon* and the java-apache group use Mindvision Installer, which is
> > licenced to the ASF, I believe. I just rolled the JServ 1.1.1
> > release with it. Not
> > as slick as InstallShield or Wise, but you already have it...
> Isnt it a free edition, for non-commercial use? As far as i
> remember, there is note shown in the install dialogs.
>
> /me
> --
> Open Server Architecture project http://www.opensa.org/
> Daniel S. Reichenbach dsr@opensa.org
>
RE: [Fwd: Got news about the 1.0.0 release ?]
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@lnd.com>.
> From: Daniel S. Reichenbach [mailto:dsr@opensa.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 4:40 PM
>
> > jon* and the java-apache group use Mindvision Installer, which is
> > licenced to the ASF, I believe. I just rolled the JServ 1.1.1
> > release with it. Not
> > as slick as InstallShield or Wise, but you already have it...
>
> Isnt it a free edition, for non-commercial use? As far as i
> remember, there is note shown in the install dialogs.
Remember some of the uses of Apache can be considered 'commercial',
ergo that scope is a bad thing. We avoid GPL for similar reasons.
-Free- is cool, but the exceptions are badness.
Bill
RE: [Fwd: Got news about the 1.0.0 release ?]
Posted by "Daniel S. Reichenbach" <ds...@opensa.org>.
> jon* and the java-apache group use Mindvision Installer, which is
> licenced to the ASF, I believe. I just rolled the JServ 1.1.1
> release with it. Not
> as slick as InstallShield or Wise, but you already have it...
Isnt it a free edition, for non-commercial use? As far as i
remember, there is note shown in the install dialogs.
/me
--
Open Server Architecture project http://www.opensa.org/
Daniel S. Reichenbach dsr@opensa.org
RE: [Fwd: Got news about the 1.0.0 release ?]
Posted by Scott Sanders <sc...@eionline.com>.
jon* and the java-apache group use Mindvision Installer, which is licenced
to the ASF, I believe. I just rolled the JServ 1.1.1 release with it. Not
as slick as InstallShield or Wise, but you already have it...
> It would be nice to consider a free software installer
> package, open source would be still nicer.
Maybee the Windows Installer in it`s plain form from M$
or the Visual Studio Installer would be of use as a free
alternative.
Visual Studio installer can be found here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/downloads/vsi/default.asp
The original Windows Installer can be found here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/sdks/platform/wininst.asp
RE: [Fwd: Got news about the 1.0.0 release ?]
Posted by "Daniel S. Reichenbach" <ds...@opensa.org>.
> It would be nice to consider a free software installer
> package, open source would be still nicer.
Maybee the Windows Installer in it`s plain form from M$
or the Visual Studio Installer would be of use as a free
alternative.
Visual Studio installer can be found here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/downloads/vsi/default.asp
The original Windows Installer can be found here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/sdks/platform/wininst.asp
> I was about ready to roll something vanilla out of what
> Win32 already does. Anyone have a lead before I attack?
I would really love to help in that case, e.g i could
build the install packages or contrib my installshield
scripts and stuff i did for OpenSA.
/me
--
Open Server Architecture project http://www.opensa.org/
Daniel S. Reichenbach dsr@opensa.org
RE: [Fwd: Got news about the 1.0.0 release ?]
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@lnd.com>.
It would be nice to consider a free software installer
package, open source would be still nicer.
I was about ready to roll something vanilla out of what
Win32 already does. Anyone have a lead before I attack?
(Yes, there is a 'free' version of installshield, but we
need to run some fixup code somewhere in the process.
This will be simplified in 2.0, since after installation,
the program will simply run the command:
Apache -k install -s manual
With a new option to identify if the service starts up
only manually, automatic, or is disabled entirely.)
Bill
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rodent of Unusual Size [mailto:Ken.Coar@Golux.Com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 6:04 AM
> To: Apache Developers
> Subject: [Fwd: Got news about the 1.0.0 release ?]
>
>
> Is this something we should consider?
> --
> #ken P-)}
>
> Ken Coar <http://Golux.Com/coar/>
> Apache Software Foundation <http://www.apache.org/>
> "Apache Server for Dummies" <http://Apache-Server.Com/>
> "Apache Server Unleashed" <http://ApacheUnleashed.Com/>