jimjag

14 ms·

91.
by jimjag 10y ago
Maybe donation of the code to an FOSS foundation, like maybe Apache, might be a way of ensuring the community continues. Or, at least, gives it the fighting chance to do so... DM me if curious
92.
Apache httpd 2.4.25 Released(apache.org)
2 points by jimjag 10y ago|0 comments
93.
by jimjag 10y ago
Would be nice to have some docs or examples related to this
94.
by jimjag 10y ago
This basically sez 'Don't assume a specific answer when something is undefined'. As long as you don't, and experienced C programmers don't, then what is the big deal?
95.
by jimjag 10y ago
Apache Traffic Server is the bee's-knees. ++1!
96.
by jimjag 10y ago
There is this sad idea that "threads are bad" and that event is the cat's pajamas. But even nginx admits that there are situations where threads make sense, hence their semi-recent addition to adding them. I encourage people
97.
by jimjag 10y ago
There is this concept, especially in enterprise level architecture which is similar to a separation of concerns; basically that you use tools to solve a particular need. Sure, one could get by using the built-in caching of nginx or Apache h
98.
by jimjag 10y ago
Apache started life as a huge collection of patches onto something else rather then implementing everything itself, and many would argue that this history still shows in negative ways at times. Apache is a great project, but it really isn&
99.
The Apache OpenOffice Project Announces Apache OpenOffice v4.1.3(blogs.apache.org)
1 points by jimjag 10y ago|0 comments
100.
by jimjag 10y ago
"The issue is that the Apache Foundation have been used as a dumping ground for "unwanted" projects." Not quite... instead, Apache has been used by some projects to give it a "kick-in-the-pants" and a renewed o
101.
by jimjag 10y ago
That is good to know. Thx.
102.
by jimjag 10y ago
They mention HAProxy, but it doesn't look like it's based on it.
103.
by jimjag 10y ago
I am increasingly bothered by the "not invented here" syndrome where instead of taking existing projects and enhancing them, in true open source fashion, people instead re-create from scratch. It is then justified that their creat
104.
by jimjag 10y ago
++1!!
105.
by jimjag 10y ago
1: Performance. varnish provides much less latency. 2: More control. 3: Better compliance
106.
by jimjag 10y ago
"In theory if you have enough RAM you can go faster than nginx's on-disk... in practice the sweet spot for the gain is small and they're both on par" Not in theory, but in reality. Even if you don't, varnish's
107.
by jimjag 10y ago
If you need just a generic cache, then using varnish, nginx or httpd are all fine choices. The issue is when you start scaling at obscene amounts of traffic. At that point, having a single single attempting to do too many things just doesn&
108.
by jimjag 10y ago
"Is it me or has Apache increasingly become the place open source projects of big companies go to die? OpenOffice, Geronimo, Harmony, Wave, etc.pp." It's just you :) Seriously though, that is a mistaken impression, bolstered
109.
by jimjag 10y ago
The discussions and rationale for accepting any and all projects is done on-list, on the public Incubator threads. There are no "side deals" or "arrangements" other that was is opening and publicly discussed. In any case
110.
by jimjag 10y ago
Apache's IP provenance is also considerably robust and respected.
111.
by jimjag 10y ago
"So it's not like there aren't already chances for the integration you propose, that span a broader section of the FOSS landscape than just LO/AOO. But ... You'll see that Document Liberation is spearheaded by LO&#x
112.
by jimjag 10y ago
If the whole issue is "Copyleft Good; Permissive Bad" (as implied by "But championing "we also allow proprietary forks" is not helping any users of free software."), then there is nothing more to discuss. There
113.
by jimjag 10y ago
It is a shame that the article is behind a paywall; it sounds as if it is a very well balanced article. There seems to have been many things that people forgot about when following the previous thread ( https://lwn.net/Articl
114.
by jimjag 10y ago
The Open Office eco-system is larger, by far, than LO and AOO. Maybe LO may not benefit at all from a permissive licensed core (although it certainly has benefited from it, as noted elsewhere), but certainly other OO implementations might
115.
by jimjag 10y ago
Sure, I didn't say all LO developers. But from what I've seen (and to be fair, this recollection is a bit old) a lot of the LO people showed a lot of resistance to having code flow back the other way I will share a story. Awhile
116.
by jimjag 10y ago
That is news to me... I've yet to see any real viable patches returned back to AOO. Very occasionally I will see large chunks of code that need to be extremely re-factored to be consumed by AOO, but that's not backwards contributi
117.
by jimjag 10y ago
I'd like to see some of those patches...
118.
by jimjag 10y ago
"users"?? Hardly. Instead, it shows that should copyleft people desire, they can severely damage permissive projects by simply not doing what their own license requires. They kind of prove the point that you have to force people
119.
by jimjag 10y ago
I think you are proving my point... AOO was "plundered" by LO but LO never gave anything back. So any "co-opporation" was extremely one-sided and one-direction. It was hoped that LO, as good FOSS neighbors, would donate
120.
by jimjag 10y ago
There are people on both sides that suffer from that condition. It does nothing to improve or further the discussion.

More ›