On Monday 23 June 2008 23:16:22 bardo wrote:
Right thats the phylosphical problem i have. I believe the apache project knows alot more about apache then some random bash hackers who call themself "distro developers" .
Sorry for replying on this point, I really shouldn't, but I couldn't resist. If you think Aaron is a 'random bash hacker', just take a look at code.phraktured.net and find out how this is not true.
eww sorry. this was a pretty bad assembled statement indeed. No i wasnt refering to any specific person. fear my social skills... meh
Now you call them insane
Come on, he was obviously referring to their default configurations, not to the developers themselves. Insane devs exist, just search the archives for 'ion3' or 'sancho' (ok, not this one - I'll write about it in a few days ;).
heh, yeah. but thats an upstream problem. whoever wants to use that software has to live with it :P apache though, i strongly believe, has been made by pretty good software engineers. I know some of them and maybe there are a little insane personalities but surely they know how to maintain their software.
These are dark days where the upstream has to report bugs to the downstream. sigh.
I've seen this myself, and it's really sad. Anyway I don't feel Arch has outstanding "downstream bugs". I could be very wrong.
err... apache? qt? linux? no well not outstanding if you compare to other distros like debian who really really screw up (QtGui is even ABI incompatible on debian to other systems) or RHEL who add patches to support pre stonage API. *shudder*
The best hacker is not necessarily antisocial, you know. I usually both look for documents by myself and ask real human beings: you should know that the biggest problem nof FOSS projects is the lack of documentation. I shouldn't have to be a search engine guru to use some piece of software.
I'd like not to comment on that becouse it is not relevant. You know exacly that i didnt say "screw all those n00bs".
So you're saying developers are insane to ship such a config for one of the most used softwares around? </troll> :-)
No, i'm saying that the priorities are broken. Fixing existsing bugs should have a higher prio then introducing new ones. I admit that adding new features is more fun, yeah...
2) a production setup i supposed to be evaluated by an experienced admin specificaly for the environment. "Just installing a webserver" is the reason why we have so many infected machines around.
Good point. So no users should ever start using linux or - god forbid! - installing a server because, you know, there's so much to learn *before* you actually do that, and a public ip could make their machine a 'production setup'.
huh? sorry i wasnt able to follow your points. i'll take that was "trolling" ok? -- mit freundlichen Grüßen / best regards Arvid Ephraim Picciani