Rewrites considered harmful or necessary?

Rewrites considered harmful is a recent story on Slashdot. One of his case studies (such as they are) is Apache 1.x vs. Apache 2.x. As one of the many contributors involved in Apache HTTP Server, I think I should chime in here...

There's been a number of threads on dev@httpd.apache.org about why we didn't just go to 1.4, and every time our answer is the same: 'Why don't you do it?' One of the key philosophies in our brand of OSS is that we won't stop anyone from working on it. But, don't ask us why we're not supporting it. Each one of us has made our own decision about what version to support and not to support.

I personally think the integration of mod_dav, mod_ssl, split of APR/APR-util (which has spawned a new set of programs using it - see Subversion), and the new filtering system are worth it. I think most of us who work on Apache HTTP Server believe that 2.x is a better platform to write modules on than 1.3. Apache HTTP Server 1.3 has known issues that limit what functionality we can provide (good luck adding threading, IPv6, filtering, or portability that doesn't require hard-coded defines).

That's not to say that we aren't immune to user migration claims. But, is it all that hard to upgrade? I think the rationale behind most people not upgrading is that they are happy with 1.3. As things start to require Apache HTTP Server 2.x (ahem Subversion ahem), I think we'll see the migration rate rise. A few exceptions - like mod_perl - are harder to migrate, but that's because they are really meta-modules not modules that provide functionality. Almost all configuration directives should work from 1.3 in 2.0, too.

But, we've been attacked for this for years, and everyone just throws stones rather than help fix the problems themselves. So, stop whining. If you don't want to upgrade, don't. And, we're not insulted if you stick with 1.3. Just don't ask for support from me...

[/apache] permanent link

The Planet Lives...

So, it seems that Planet Apache is now live. And, it seems that people have different lengths on what they will allow in their feeds? Some do complete feeds, some do partial feeds.

I've installed the foreshortened plugin on blosxom and I think I can turn it on for my feeds, but I'm wondering what we're intending. Will people just come to Planet Apache for the 'highlights' or is it a true group blog without the 'highlights'?

I think I've got writebacks enabled on my own blog, and I might have trackbacks too, but I have no clue if they are working or not. And, I know that my atom feed is working. (blosxom's RSS 0.91 feed doesn't work with the planet software.)

[/apache] permanent link