You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com> on 1998/01/09 16:22:13 UTC

Re: STATUS in apachen (fwd)

I love archives... I _knew_ someone had first suggested putting the patches
in a dir.

Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> From new-httpd-owner-new-httpd-archive=hyperreal.org@apache.org Fri Jan  9 10:19 EST 1998
> MBOX-Line: From new-httpd-owner-new-httpd-archive=hyperreal.org@apache.org Tue Dec 23 01:42:44 1997 remote from taz.hyperreal.org
> Delivered-To: new-httpd-archive@hyperreal.org
> To: new-httpd@apache.org
> Subject: Re: STATUS in apachen 
> In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 20 Dec 1997 17:45:01 EST."
>              <34...@Golux.Com> 
> Date: Mon, 22 Dec 1997 17:33:13 -0800
> From: "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@kiwi.ics.uci.edu>
> Message-ID:  <97...@paris.ics.uci.edu>
> Precedence: bulk
> Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org
> Sender: jim@hyperreal.org
> 
> >Erm, is it too late?  I'd like to suggest that STATUS be kept in
> >apache-devsite rather than apachen.  Aside from not adding another
> >step to how-to-release, that seems to be a more natural place for
> >it anyway.  I would prefer that INDENT had been put there, too.
> >
> >Does anyone object to putting project meta-activity files there
> >rather than in the development tree itself?
> 
> I'd object -- these things need to be as close to where the work
> is being done as possible.  I'd also advocate creating a patches
> directory in there as well.  Anything that reduces the overhead
> of applying, testing, and voting for someone else's patch is
> a good thing, IMHO.
> 
> ....Roy
> 
> 


-- 
====================================================================
      Jim Jagielski            |       jaguNET Access Services
     jim@jaguNET.com           |       http://www.jaguNET.com/
            "Look at me! I'm wearing a cardboard belt!"

Re: STATUS in apachen (fwd)

Posted by Rob Hartill <ro...@imdb.com>.
On Fri, 9 Jan 1998, Jim Jagielski wrote:

> I love archives... I _knew_ someone had first suggested putting the patches
> in a dir.

you had the 'R' bit right.   :-)

> > I'd object -- these things need to be as close to where the work
> > is being done as possible.  I'd also advocate creating a patches
> > directory in there as well.  Anything that reduces the overhead
> > of applying, testing, and voting for someone else's patch is
> > a good thing, IMHO.
> > 
> > ....Roy