httpd 2.4 is coming, RFC on module packaging draft
Daniel J Walsh
dwalsh at redhat.com
Wed Mar 28 12:56:18 UTC 2012
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 03/27/2012 03:19 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 03/27/2012 05:15 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> I think "removing the legacy cruft" just for the goal of removing it is not helpful at all and is actually the main cause of "half baked", "half removed" stuff in Fedora.
> Interesting how did you come to that conclusion?
>> I assume that that mod_access_compat module only requires a few bytes, so I don't see why it should not be loaded by default forever (or at least as long as upstream supports it, which hopefully will be for the whole 2.4 cycle).
> Few bytes for mod_access_compat here, few bytes for something else there....
>> Of course, web app packages in Fedora itself SHOULD be updated to the new directives, but that's not a reason to gratuitously break the old ones.
> It's my experience that things dont seem to get fixed unless they are broken and what "compat" does is just delaying the inevitable...
> Those web app maintainers that actually bother to monitor upstream have already made the necessary changes to their relevant component and did so as soon as 2.4 got release and probably are just waiting until we start shipping 2.4.
> It's those that dont and they will drag their feets in doing so until that compatibility is removed...
Joe, I am not sure how this effects SELinux labeling, if it does at all.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the devel