[opensuse-factory] Time to jettison the '2' in 'apache2' ?
Hi - It has been four years since Apache 1.3 went EOL. Is it time to get rid of the '2' in, e.g., 'apache2', 'httpd2', 'apache2ctl', etc.? The official docs at http://httpd.apache.org do not use it. Impact on users could be minimized by including symlinks from httpd2 -> httpd, etc. Nathan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Mon, 2014-04-14 at 15:45 +0200, Nathan Cutler wrote:
Hi -
It has been four years since Apache 1.3 went EOL. Is it time to get rid of the '2' in, e.g., 'apache2', 'httpd2', 'apache2ctl', etc.?
The official docs at http://httpd.apache.org do not use it.
Impact on users could be minimized by including symlinks from httpd2 -> httpd, etc.
Nathan
+1 from me, sounds reasonable and using symlinks (for a release or two?) would mitigate the transition -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Mon, 14 Apr 2014 16:40, Richard Brown
On Mon, 2014-04-14 at 15:45 +0200, Nathan Cutler wrote:
Hi -
It has been four years since Apache 1.3 went EOL. Is it time to get rid of the '2' in, e.g., 'apache2', 'httpd2', 'apache2ctl', etc.?
The official docs at http://httpd.apache.org do not use it.
Impact on users could be minimized by including symlinks from httpd2 -> httpd, etc.
Nathan
+1 from me, sounds reasonable and using symlinks (for a release or two?) would mitigate the transition
+1 from me, too. If we have to do such a numbering again, please include the minor version, too (e.g. apache26). Looking back that would have spared us some headaches (here: 2.0.x -> 2.2.x, esp. 2.2.x -> 2.4.x) The changes in apache config made it VERY painfull to upgrade. "Seamlessly" is something else. Apache seems to excel in as-painful-as-possible-to-upgrade. To be able to use apache2.4 paralell to apache 2.6 would have spared me many headaches. In reality is was easier to convert my serve-as-is virtual name servers to thttpd. Sorry for the rant, but there are about 6 weeks of worktime lost due to 2.2 -> 2.4 and the config changes. - Yamaban. PS: Please do the support team a favour and include a big warning in SLE 12 that reusing prior config for new apache http servers (2.4.x) (e.g. resuing SLE11 config) will NOT work and will NOT be supported. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
El 14/04/14 10:45, Nathan Cutler escribió:
Hi -
It has been four years since Apache 1.3 went EOL. Is it time to get rid of the '2' in, e.g., 'apache2', 'httpd2', 'apache2ctl', etc.?
The official docs at http://httpd.apache.org do not use it.
Impact on users could be minimized by including symlinks from httpd2 -> httpd, etc.
Nathan
Nope, I am not changing this, unless you give me a damn good reason. it is just a distribution implementation detail and does not affect the functionality. -- Cristian "I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody." -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 04/14/2014 10:23 AM, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
El 14/04/14 10:45, Nathan Cutler escribió:
Hi -
It has been four years since Apache 1.3 went EOL. Is it time to get rid of the '2' in, e.g., 'apache2', 'httpd2', 'apache2ctl', etc.?
The official docs at http://httpd.apache.org do not use it.
Impact on users could be minimized by including symlinks from httpd2 -> httpd, etc.
Nathan
Nope, I am not changing this, unless you give me a damn good reason. it is just a distribution implementation detail and does not affect the functionality.
+1 I see no advantage to removing the "2". To me, changing the name to "apache" seems to be change just for the sake of change, and needing to add symlinks just cruds up an already too complicated file structure. Larry -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 14/04/14 11:34 AM, Larry Finger wrote:
On 04/14/2014 10:23 AM, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
El 14/04/14 10:45, Nathan Cutler escribió:
Hi -
It has been four years since Apache 1.3 went EOL. Is it time to get rid of the '2' in, e.g., 'apache2', 'httpd2', 'apache2ctl', etc.?
The official docs at http://httpd.apache.org do not use it.
Impact on users could be minimized by including symlinks from httpd2 -> httpd, etc.
Nathan
Nope, I am not changing this, unless you give me a damn good reason. it is just a distribution implementation detail and does not affect the functionality.
+1
I see no advantage to removing the "2". To me, changing the name to "apache" seems to be change just for the sake of change, and needing to add symlinks just cruds up an already too complicated file structure. I agree and at some point there will be an apache3 living alongside apache2 for the transition period.
Larry
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
El 14/04/14 10:45, Nathan Cutler escribió:
Hi -
It has been four years since Apache 1.3 went EOL. Is it time to get rid of the '2' in, e.g., 'apache2', 'httpd2', 'apache2ctl', etc.?
The official docs at http://httpd.apache.org do not use it.
Impact on users could be minimized by including symlinks from httpd2 -> httpd, etc.
Nathan
Nope, I am not changing this, unless you give me a damn good reason. it is just a distribution implementation detail and does not affect the functionality.
Agree. Potentially a lot of work for no reason. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (15.2°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - your free DNS host, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Hi, On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 12:23:15PM -0300, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
El 14/04/14 10:45, Nathan Cutler escribió:
It has been four years since Apache 1.3 went EOL. Is it time to get rid of the '2' in, e.g., 'apache2', 'httpd2', 'apache2ctl', etc.?
The official docs at http://httpd.apache.org do not use it.
Impact on users could be minimized by including symlinks from httpd2 -> httpd, etc.
Nope, I am not changing this, unless you give me a damn good reason. it is just a distribution implementation detail and does not affect the functionality.
Nathan has given a very good reason. The upstream project documentation and all the other verndors are using a different naming schema. Therefor the waste majority of documentation covering Apache has no 2 in it. Neither do the binaries they talk about include a 2. Independent if the 2 is in the middle of the command name or at the end. If we applied this style of argumentation we still would split the distribution into series directories and organize everything to fit well onto floppy disks. Not anybody might know why we had package names like bind8 and bind9 in the past. It allowed us to ship both versions in parallel. That was highly appreciated at a time when general network access wasn't ubiquitous. Then it was a very welcome feature to have both versions on the pressed CD set. People bought this material and had been very happy to get bind verion 8 and 9. At that time, 10 years back, that was an apprciated feature to save download volume if people had network access at all. But in 2014? With Apache this is quite different today. Go back yourself and check when we had both versions on the media. IIRC it was SUSE Linux 9.0 Yes, the move suggested now should have been done ten years back already. But wait, there are more arguments. With the OBS technology in place today we're quite different positioned. There is no further need to add the major version as a suffix to a package name if we like to be able to maintain two versions of the software. All we do is to use the same naming schema in two independent projects. And the one we consider most stable we use as the development project for openSUSE Factory. Having the major verison as suffix for a shared library is a different topic. Cause here it sometimes is required to offer libfoo2 and libfoo3 at the same time. But that covered quite well with our shared library policy. The more hacks and superfluous differences from upstream we have the harder it will be for us as a project to share and participate with the general Open Source Software community. Adding a sym link to address this flaw is nothing than a quick hack/ workaround and not the real/ permanent solution. @Cristian: Nobody requested from you to push this change. This is a cleanup we as the openSUSE community at all should care about. Therefore Nathan started the discussion. Cheers, Lars -- Lars Müller [ˈlaː(r)z ˈmʏlɐ] Samba Team + SUSE Labs SUSE Linux, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
Hi, Am 17.04.2014 11:58, schrieb Lars Müller:
Nope, I am not changing this, unless you give me a damn good reason. it is just a distribution implementation detail and does not affect the functionality.
Nathan has given a very good reason. The upstream project documentation and all the other verndors are using a different naming schema.
"all the other vendors"? RedHat/CentOS/Fedora: httpd Debian: apache2 guess all Debian derivatives: apache2 So I don't see which all other vendors are using a different naming schema. Actually I don't care that much but this argument is weak imho. Wolfgang -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Thu, 17 Apr 2014 12:19, Wolfgang Rosenauer
Hi,
Am 17.04.2014 11:58, schrieb Lars Müller:
Nope, I am not changing this, unless you give me a damn good reason. it is just a distribution implementation detail and does not affect the functionality.
Nathan has given a very good reason. The upstream project documentation and all the other vendors are using a different naming schema.
"all the other vendors"?
RedHat/CentOS/Fedora: httpd Debian: apache2 guess all Debian derivatives: apache2
So I don't see which all other vendors are using a different naming schema.
Actually I don't care that much but this argument is weak imho.
Good point. Very good point. IMHO "httpd" is just wrong, as there are many of that kind of service. So, stay with "apache2" as package name for now (OSS 13.2 and SLE 12). The naming of the binaries and scripts OTOH, should be thought about. Either put them "back" to upstream defaults, (and use upstream docs), or invest the work to make sure the documentation (esp. man-pages) match the reality. Ah, the choice of poison! (and work to do before next Gold-Master) - Yamaban.
participants (9)
-
Cristian Rodríguez -
Larry Finger -
Lars Müller -
Nathan Cutler -
Per Jessen -
Richard Brown -
Tom Parker -
Wolfgang Rosenauer -
Yamaban