Hi,
I don't really care about Apache specifically but I feel the need to
chime in.
On 12/02/2013 09:06 PM, Leonid Isaev wrote:
On Mon, 2 Dec 2013 11:32:13 -0800
Anatol Pomozov <anatol.pomozov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi,
This situation with apache-2.4 reminds me recent saga with libxml2
update. libxml2 was marked out-of-date for 9 months and maintainer
ignored requests about upgrading the package. The only explanation was
"if maintainer does not upgrade the package there must be a good
reason for it - new version probably breaks other apps". But it end up
that the new libxml2 package did not break anyone and upgrade was very
simple - it was just a version bump and no dependencies rebuild was
needed. I made a conclusion that maintainer just lost interest in
supporting libxml2.
What exactly are you complaining about? Apache 2.2 is still supported
upstream (2.2.26 was released on 11/16/2013 -- two weeks ago). Apache 2.4 is
just another branch. So why is apache-2.2 old?
"We consider the Apache HTTP Server 2.4 release to be the best version
of Apache available, and encourage users of 2.2 and all prior versions
to upgrade. This 2.2 maintenance release is offered for those unable to
upgrade at this time." [1]
Because upstream itself says so?
Could it be the same situation with apache-2.2 package? If the
maintainer lost interest would it be better to drop Apache to
'community' repo where it has higher chance to be upgraded? IMHO it is
shame for Arch to keep old versions of software without clear
explanation, 2.4.1 was released almost 2 years ago!
Apache 2.2.15 was pushed in 07/2013. This situation hardly qualifies as "lost
interest". If you desperately need 2.4.7 and are absolutely sure that it is
compatible with 2.2 why not just compile it yourself?
Cheers,
"Arch Linux strives to maintain the latest stable release versions of
its software as long as systemic package breakage can be reasonably
avoided." [2]
I thought Arch strives to be as up-to-date and bleeding edge as
possible? So the question is if there is systematic breakage and if not,
why there is no Apache 2.4 package available in the official
repositories. Sure, people can compile it themselves but why do they
have to?
[1] https://www.apache.org/dist/httpd/Announcement2.2.html
[2] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_Linux
