Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apache 1.3.32 Released

Posted by michael on from the 1.3-will-never-die dept.

chipster writes "Apache 1.3.32 has been released. This version of Apache is principally a security and bug fix release. You can read about the new features here, and get Apache 1.3.32 here. Also available is the 1.3 ChangeLog. Additionally, to compliment this release of Apache, mod_ssl- 2.8.21-1.3.32 has also been released."

3 of 27 comments (clear)

  1. Practical difference between Apache 1.3 & 2.0 by Arcane_Rhino · · Score: 2, Interesting
    What is the practical difference between Apache 1.3.# and Apache 2.0.#?

    1.3 ships with OS X (yes, I am one of those) and has always performed great. Plus, it is integrated in the operating system. I have always been curious about what advantages 2.0 might have and whether I should upgrade. I have installed it a couple of times, both from source and from binary but found it had to be executed from the shell. No big deal but the fact that I have not seen where anyone has integrated 2.0 into OS X's GUI web server makes me wonder why. I also do not want to ignorantly hand my bandwidth and personal files to everyone on the internet so I have been hesitant to simply jump in and begin serving with 2.0 without fully understanding what I am doing. (I am shell comfortable but not savvy.)

    I appreciate anyone who is willing to share their experience or knowledge or has a good link.

    Thanks.

  2. Re:1.3 VS 2.0 by ttfkam · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The old license (and the BSD license) only dealt with copyright, not patents. The Apache 2.0 license adds a patent clause.

    If you get into a patent war with the ASF, you can't use ASF code anymore. This is terribly unfree? Apparently we have differing views on what "free" is. Since a software developer needs a cadre of patent lawyers on their side with the way things are going on the software patent arena, I for one welcome the clause. It allows me the freedom to compete and participate in a field that is steadily becoming more and more hostile to independent developers thanks to the USPTO and WIPO.

    If he (Theo) has an argument with parts of the new license, then he should critique those parts of the new license. "More stuff" does not make an effective or lucid critique in my opinion nor does your assertion of "unfree stuff."

    Unfree stuff like what? Be more specific. Convince me. Unfree stuff like what? Like the fact that the license is legalese? C'mon. That's laziness. It's what? 200 lines long? Spend an hour or two some evening going over it and be done with it. If there's something there that truly concerns you, let me know. I would like to know what you see as a problem.

    --

    - I don't need to go outside, my CRT tan'll do me just fine.
  3. Apache security documentation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting


    http://www.cgisecurity.com/webservers/apache/