Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Sites Rejecting Apache 2?

Posted by krow on from the what-if-you-build-it-and-they-do-not-come dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Vnunet reports on the low adoption of Apache 2 has caused its producers to advocate freezing development of the open-source Web server until makers of add-in software catch up. Almost six months after the launch of Apache 2, less than one percent of sites use it, due to a lack of suitable third-party modules." I'm not sure where they are getting the freezing Apache development part, more talk about forking for 2.1 right now on the httpd mailing list. The article does have it right though that until there is a reason to upgrade and the modules are in place that adoption is not going to happen. While the cores of both Perl and PHP are thread-safe, the third-party modules are not. This renders one the larger reasons to use Apache 2.0, the threaded http support, useless for applications using either of these application layers. It comes down to the question of whether the third-party module writers are better off supporting what is used or what is new.

3 of 371 comments (clear)

  1. Progress is good and all but... by DarkHelmet · · Score: 3, Funny

    I won't switch over to Apache 2 until there's an amiga port of it!

    --
    /^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
  2. Re:Threads killed Apache 2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    You are wrong. Threads are good because they are faster. If your shop is big, faster is better. Faster equals more money for everyone.

  3. Now be honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Did any of you actually understand a word of what he just said?