atom feed9 messages in org.apache.httpd.devRe: new release?
FromSent OnAttachments
Andrew WilsonSep 25, 1995 3:19 am 
Andrew WilsonSep 25, 1995 4:26 am 
Aram W. MirzadehSep 25, 1995 7:53 am 
Aram W. MirzadehSep 25, 1995 8:52 am 
Aram W. MirzadehSep 25, 1995 11:54 am 
Rob HartillSep 25, 1995 12:01 pm 
Ben LaurieSep 26, 1995 1:13 am 
Aram W. MirzadehSep 26, 1995 7:06 am 
Rob HartillSep 26, 1995 7:53 am 
Subject:Re: new release?
From:Ben Laurie (
Date:Sep 26, 1995 1:13:11 am

At 05:26 PM 9/25/95 BST, you wrote:


+1 for the copyright stuff.. I agree. I'm not sure why you guys are macking this so hard, but hey, if you want to play with it that's fine by me. I would have just grabed the GNU leftcopy stuff, and stuck it somewhere. It works for everyone else in the freeworld.

Er, well, not everyone.

Hmm.. I haven't seen any problems with it. Anyway.... we've decided to do our own, so I guess I'll leave it alone, since I know next to nothing about copyright laws.

As I understand it, the problem with the GNU license is that it effectively prevents the inclusion of proprietary code, coz you _have_ to publish the code if you publish the binary. This would presumably also make SSL impossible. Correct me if I'm wrong.

BTW, on the copyright side ... one thing nags at me. It no longer says that Apache must be free.

+1 on going on with 1.0

-1 on including the OS/2 stuff. I think we can release it but not as a supported release.

Presumably with the intention of supporting it in 1.0.x?


-- Ben Laurie Phone: +44 (181) 994 6435 Freelance Consultant Fax: +44 (181) 994 6472 and Technical Director Email: (preferred) A.L. Digital Ltd, (backup) London, England.

[Note for the paranoid: "fear" as in "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas", "demon" as in Demon Internet Services, a commercial Internet access provider.]