|
|
Posted by Chung Leong on 01/02/06 09:28
Andrew DeFaria wrote:
> Define "support" in the context of Open Source.
Software that isn't a joke? The following sounds like a joke to me:
"this module is experimental,
its functions may change their names
or move to extension all together
so do not rely to much on them
you have been warned!"
> Regardless, as has been posted already, many people do use Apache 2 and
> PHP in production environments.
Okay, so people are supposed to make a important business decision
based on some messages they read on a newsgroup? Jesus. The big issue
is not whether it actually works but who's responsible when it doesn't.
If I'm pushing a setup that's described as experimental and something
goes wrong, who's responsible? Me.
Seriously, how long does this "experiment" have to last? Is it that
hard for them to run some tests to see if the thing works or not?
> But it already works in a production environment! Have you tried it?
Of course. And I have egg on my face to show for. I have to say, I
rather dislike having to apologize to an important client for someone
else's bugs.
> I've been using Apache 2 with PHP outputting megabytes of files with no
> problems.
If you don't believe me, take a look at the CVS:
http://cvs.php.net/viewcvs.cgi/php-src/sapi/apache2handler/sapi_apache2.c?hideattic=0&view=log#rev1.1.2.32
Yes, I actually had to rummage through the source to see when the leak
was plugged because the fix wasn't mentioned in the changelog. I had
been warned I suppose.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|