You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by William A Rowe Jr <wr...@apache.org> on 2017/04/11 05:08:54 UTC
Re: svn commit: r1790917 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 11:25 PM, <wr...@apache.org> wrote:
> Author: wrowe
> Date: Tue Apr 11 04:25:34 2017
> New Revision: 1790917
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1790917&view=rev
> Log:
> Veto veto of veto
>
> Modified:
> httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
>
> Modified: httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS?rev=1790917&r1=1790916&r2=1790917&view=diff
> ==============================================================================
> --- httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS (original)
> +++ httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS Tue Apr 11 04:25:34 2017
> @@ -190,6 +190,8 @@ PATCHES PROPOSED TO BACKPORT FROM TRUNK:
> http://svn.apache.org/r1790853
> http://svn.apache.org/r1790860
> +1: jim, jorton,
> + -1: wrowe (build schema of 0.6.0 is as worthless as 0.5.2, git master
> + is still entirely functional, apparently waiting for 1.0.0)
I suggest we just give up for this cycle. Quoting README.md from 0.6.0...
To build and run tests, simply do:
$ ./configure && make
If you want to install brotli, use one of the more advanced build systems below.
#### Bazel
See [Bazel](http://www.bazel.build/)
#### CMake
The basic commands to build, test and install brotli are:
$ mkdir out && cd out && ../configure-cmake && make
$ make test
$ make install
You can use other [CMake](https://cmake.org/) configuration. For example, to
build static libraries and use a custom installation directory:
[...]
[wrowe@hub Brotli-0.6.0]$ ls
common dec include MANIFEST.in python setup.cfg tools
CONTRIBUTING.md enc LICENSE PKG-INFO README.md setup.py
That's adorkable :) And also an unusable package. I was trying to
review to simply determine if the command-line utility ('/usr/bin/bro',
which conflicts with Ubuntu and RedHat packages) had actually
been adjusted to a unique name, but no... no such luck.
Re: svn commit: r1790917 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
> On Apr 11, 2017, at 9:14 AM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 6:32 AM, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jagunet.com> wrote:
>> /me confused. Why the -1 again? Are you having problems
>> building brotli? Or is it that you don't like how
>> brotli is being built? Or what?
>
> The docs were a mess - issues I had address on dev@. Until Monday,
> after you had removed my vote.
>
Which docs?
> They are in quite a better place now.
>
> I don't find brotli-0.6.0 + httpd buildable without additional docs
> that weren't coming from either package. Once again, we are back
> to slapdash feature-injection-without-docs bugs in httpd "stable".
>
Again, /me curious. Docs can always be updated. They are CTR
specifically so that there are almost never the hold up.
I, and others, had no trouble *building* brotli... Why are
we holding up a feature for Apache due to some mysterious
build issues you seem to be having? It's an completely
voluntary, external, 3rd party dependency. If you don't
want it, or can't build it, then there is NO requirement
for it.
Re: svn commit: r1790917 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
Posted by William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 6:32 AM, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jagunet.com> wrote:
> /me confused. Why the -1 again? Are you having problems
> building brotli? Or is it that you don't like how
> brotli is being built? Or what?
The docs were a mess - issues I had address on dev@. Until Monday,
after you had removed my vote.
They are in quite a better place now.
I don't find brotli-0.6.0 + httpd buildable without additional docs
that weren't coming from either package. Once again, we are back
to slapdash feature-injection-without-docs bugs in httpd "stable".
However, It seems the issue is recognized upstream and we may
have a fix very shortly.
https://github.com/google/brotli/issues/539
Looking forward to pulling my negative vote, myself, when this comes
to pass.
Re: svn commit: r1790917 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
> On Apr 11, 2017, at 10:01 AM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>
>
> That's why my veto was just withdrawn, the sources *do* build, from
> the git tag.
Mine was from the gzipped tarball downloaded from Github.
Re: svn commit: r1790917 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
Posted by William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 8:18 AM, Stefan Eissing
<st...@greenbytes.de> wrote:
> I do not understand why we are discussing brotli build issues here. We do not plan to ship it, only to link against their now supposedly stable API if we find it. If Linux distros are willing to build and package it and solve any conflicts they might have in naming bins, I am totally fine with that.
Nope, that would totally keep my veto in place. We don't ship source
code for the Linux distros good at no charge. We ship source code
for the public good at no charge. Part of that is that anyone with some
technical savvy can build and use our code, not the limited few who
can divine what our source code does with no docs, no references.
> mod_brotli, I just built and tested in my environment. It works nicely, people want it, I voted for it.
That's why my veto was just withdrawn, the sources *do* build, from
the git tag. What I believed was a regression of the source distribution
(back to the state of 0.5.2) was actually mispackaging or mislabeling
that is being remedied.
Code that can't be built does not need to be supported here. There
are plenty of third party modules that work nicely and which people
want, that are not a fit here for one reason or another. Not buildable
by our users would rank high on that list.
Re: svn commit: r1790917 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
Posted by Stefan Eissing <st...@greenbytes.de>.
I do not understand why we are discussing brotli build issues here. We do not plan to ship it, only to link against their now supposedly stable API if we find it. If Linux distros are willing to build and package it and solve any conflicts they might have in naming bins, I am totally fine with that.
mod_brotli, I just built and tested in my environment. It works nicely, people want it, I voted for it.
-Stefan
> Am 11.04.2017 um 13:32 schrieb Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>:
>
> /me confused. Why the -1 again? Are you having problems
> building brotli? Or is it that you don't like how
> brotli is being built? Or what?
>
>> On Apr 11, 2017, at 1:08 AM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 11:25 PM, <wr...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Author: wrowe
>>> Date: Tue Apr 11 04:25:34 2017
>>> New Revision: 1790917
>>>
>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1790917&view=rev
>>> Log:
>>> Veto veto of veto
>>>
>>> Modified:
>>> httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
>>>
>>> Modified: httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS?rev=1790917&r1=1790916&r2=1790917&view=diff
>>> ==============================================================================
>>> --- httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS (original)
>>> +++ httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS Tue Apr 11 04:25:34 2017
>>> @@ -190,6 +190,8 @@ PATCHES PROPOSED TO BACKPORT FROM TRUNK:
>>> http://svn.apache.org/r1790853
>>> http://svn.apache.org/r1790860
>>> +1: jim, jorton,
>>> + -1: wrowe (build schema of 0.6.0 is as worthless as 0.5.2, git master
>>> + is still entirely functional, apparently waiting for 1.0.0)
>>
>>
>> I suggest we just give up for this cycle. Quoting README.md from 0.6.0...
>>
>> To build and run tests, simply do:
>>
>> $ ./configure && make
>>
>> If you want to install brotli, use one of the more advanced build systems below.
>>
>> #### Bazel
>>
>> See [Bazel](http://www.bazel.build/)
>>
>> #### CMake
>>
>> The basic commands to build, test and install brotli are:
>>
>> $ mkdir out && cd out && ../configure-cmake && make
>> $ make test
>> $ make install
>>
>> You can use other [CMake](https://cmake.org/) configuration. For example, to
>> build static libraries and use a custom installation directory:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>
>> [wrowe@hub Brotli-0.6.0]$ ls
>> common dec include MANIFEST.in python setup.cfg tools
>> CONTRIBUTING.md enc LICENSE PKG-INFO README.md setup.py
>>
>>
>> That's adorkable :) And also an unusable package. I was trying to
>> review to simply determine if the command-line utility ('/usr/bin/bro',
>> which conflicts with Ubuntu and RedHat packages) had actually
>> been adjusted to a unique name, but no... no such luck.
>
Re: svn commit: r1790917 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
/me confused. Why the -1 again? Are you having problems
building brotli? Or is it that you don't like how
brotli is being built? Or what?
> On Apr 11, 2017, at 1:08 AM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 11:25 PM, <wr...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Author: wrowe
>> Date: Tue Apr 11 04:25:34 2017
>> New Revision: 1790917
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1790917&view=rev
>> Log:
>> Veto veto of veto
>>
>> Modified:
>> httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
>>
>> Modified: httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS?rev=1790917&r1=1790916&r2=1790917&view=diff
>> ==============================================================================
>> --- httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS (original)
>> +++ httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS Tue Apr 11 04:25:34 2017
>> @@ -190,6 +190,8 @@ PATCHES PROPOSED TO BACKPORT FROM TRUNK:
>> http://svn.apache.org/r1790853
>> http://svn.apache.org/r1790860
>> +1: jim, jorton,
>> + -1: wrowe (build schema of 0.6.0 is as worthless as 0.5.2, git master
>> + is still entirely functional, apparently waiting for 1.0.0)
>
>
> I suggest we just give up for this cycle. Quoting README.md from 0.6.0...
>
> To build and run tests, simply do:
>
> $ ./configure && make
>
> If you want to install brotli, use one of the more advanced build systems below.
>
> #### Bazel
>
> See [Bazel](http://www.bazel.build/)
>
> #### CMake
>
> The basic commands to build, test and install brotli are:
>
> $ mkdir out && cd out && ../configure-cmake && make
> $ make test
> $ make install
>
> You can use other [CMake](https://cmake.org/) configuration. For example, to
> build static libraries and use a custom installation directory:
>
> [...]
>
>
> [wrowe@hub Brotli-0.6.0]$ ls
> common dec include MANIFEST.in python setup.cfg tools
> CONTRIBUTING.md enc LICENSE PKG-INFO README.md setup.py
>
>
> That's adorkable :) And also an unusable package. I was trying to
> review to simply determine if the command-line utility ('/usr/bin/bro',
> which conflicts with Ubuntu and RedHat packages) had actually
> been adjusted to a unique name, but no... no such luck.