Re: Looking for new apache maintainer

[Christopher Faylor <cgf-no-personal-reply-please@cygwin.com>]

On Thu, May 27, 2004 at 12:09:29PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>On Thu, 27 May 2004, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>On Thu, May 27, 2004 at 08:55:02AM -0700, Brian Dessent wrote:
>>>Okay, I'll take that as an enthusiastic request for an apache2 package.
>>
>>FWIW: Me too! I think an apache2 package would be a very useful
>>addition.
>
>Ditto.
>
>Perhaps this should be moved to cygwin-apps (which Brian, as all other
>maintainers, will have to subscribe to anyway), but one more point
>while we're on the subject of Apache: maybe it's time to revisit the
>apache postinstall procedure (both the rebase issue and the /var/www
>one).  FWIW, one idea on the latter is splitting out the documents into
>a separate package (apache-docs?), installing over the manual, and
>using postinstall to set up the index.html.* files if they aren't
>present.  This way, "cygcheck -c" won't be confused by the apache
>packages anymore.  I can elaborate if there's interest.

One again, my assumptions catch up with me.  I was assuming that a new
package maintainer would be rethinking the packaging scheme.  Certainly
the current scheme could use some improvement.

But, yes, if we are going to be discusing this, then we should move to
cygwin-apps.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/