From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from callisto.cs.kun.nl (callisto.cs.kun.nl [131.174.33.75]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j3K90KYG011404 for ; Wed, 20 Apr 2005 09:00:20 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by callisto.cs.kun.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 347D42E805B for ; Wed, 20 Apr 2005 10:59:58 +0200 (CEST) From: Paul de Vrieze To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Moving the updated apache and associated =?utf-8?q?ebuilds=09back_into?= package.mask Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 10:59:46 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 References: <200504160656.43452@zippy.emcb.local> <200504192251.24493.pauldv@gentoo.org> <200504200936.40347.trapni@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <200504200936.40347.trapni@gentoo.org> X-Face: #Lb+'V@sGJ;ptgo5}V"W+5OCoo{LZv;bh,s,`WKLi/J)ed1_$0;6X<=?utf-8?q?700LVV/=3BLqPhiDP=5E=0A=09=27f=5Dfnv?=@%6M8\'HR1t=aFx;ePfp{ZQoBe+e)JOQ8T5*(_;mHY+cltLGq<;@$Y,=?utf-8?q?O=5C=24=0A=09Tm=23G6M?=,g![Q62J{na*S9d;R[^8pc%u\aiLqU@`kJtYl"^6pxdW Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1973445.ZKu3gC57xs"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200504201059.56418.pauldv@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 9b69f1ed-fa57-4eb2-b1df-567e1ecc17fe X-Archives-Hash: fc23c3f5139d5571203700848da942ef --nextPart1973445.ZKu3gC57xs Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Wednesday 20 April 2005 09:36, Christian Parpart wrote: > And yeah, I disagree to a move-back, too!! I'm most likely not to > support this in any kind, instead, I'd be willing in pushing p.mask'ed > apache httpd 2.1 into the tree, so, that I don't have to live with the > old shitty behavior again. > > Seriousely, why did we put all our power into those improvements when > we're now about to revert mostly everything? I believe that most issues are with the new configuration setup. What=20 about checking for the old configuration format and in that case=20 providing the old configuration setup. If there is no old format (or=20 allready a working new format config file) use the new config system. Paul =2D-=20 Paul de Vrieze Gentoo Developer Mail: pauldv@gentoo.org Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net --nextPart1973445.ZKu3gC57xs Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBCZhoMbKx5DBjWFdsRAjLUAJ9zkQf2nQm3Fv5Pb58NUNvVGSlJpwCfS2QC VO2vWPSIXgfxcQibmG3GgNM= =r6lG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1973445.ZKu3gC57xs-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list