[nycbug-talk] apache stability

[Pete Wright]

On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 10:08:20PM -0500, Jim Brown wrote:
> * Pete Wright <pete at finn.nomadlogic.org> [2005-01-23 21:51]:
> > On Sun, Jan 23, 2005 at 07:15:06PM -0500, Jim Brown wrote:
> > > * lists at genoverly.net <lists at genoverly.net> [2005-01-23 08:04]:
> > > > 
> > > > On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 22:55:37 -0500
> > > > "steve" <steve at n2sw.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > In your opinion is apache2 ready for production use, am looking at a 
> > > > > setup that includes php, perl, and ssl. 
> > > > 
> > > > As already stated, people run both for different reasons.  I tried 2 a
> > > > while back but had problems with PHP.  I have not re-tried in over a
> > > > year, so things may have changed.  1.3 is rock solid and tested, and
> > > > has been scrutinized by the security conscience for a long time.   If
> > > > it is OpenBSD you will run 1.3.  
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > More specifically, it's 1.3.29 and frozen there.  See the slashdot
> > > story at http://apache.slashdot.org/apache/04/06/07/1621254.shtml?tid=2&tid=7
> > > and the OBSD list discussion at 
> > > http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/openbsd/2004-06/0448.html
> > > 
> > > Bummer...
> > > 
> > 
> > depending on which side of the debate you are on this may be a good thing.  i'm 
> > personally leaning towards this being a good move by the openbsd team, as i really
> > do think the new apache lisc. is much less free than the original lisc.  anyway
> > just my 2bits ;)
> > 
> > -p
> > 
> 
> I applaud OpenBSD for taking a stance on free licenses, yes.   But I'm
> disappointed as I watch them get further and further away from production
> releases the rest of the world is using.  
> 
> There is really no good choice here.  OBSD certainly can't spend scarce
> resources to keep Apache (and other good software) up to date in their
> own sources.  But the rest of the world moves on.  Soon, those
> versions will be *way* out of date, and won't work with other software.
> What then?
> 
> I'm feeling this pain right now.  I want to put up a web site on OBSD.
> What server should I use?  Apache 1.3.29?  1.3.31?  thttpd?
> (Note, I run thttpd elsewhere and I do like it.)
> 
> No clear answers I'm afraid.  What I'm really concerned about is that this
> will start to come up over and over again.
> 

well as I understand the issue b/w Apache and the OBSD folks is that not only
are there incompatible issues with the license but it seems that there were
some patches that the OBSD folks were trying to push into the main Apache
tree that were not being accepted by the apache devs.


so...i think for the time being there is no harm in running obsd's offical
apache release (bug fixes are still being applied) and I don't think any major
new functionality should be making it's way into the 1.3 branch anyway so 
most people should be OK.  frankly I'm not even %100 convinced that the changes
in apache 2.x would benefit most people running OBSD...although i could totally
be wrong on that one....

-p



-- 
~~oO00Oo~~
Peter Wright
pete at nomadlogic.org
www.nomadlogic.org/~pete
917.415.9866