Looking for new apache maintainer

[Andrew DeFaria]

Brian Dessent wrote:

> I hadn't planned to package 2.x because its native win32 version would 
> be significantly faster with a thread MPM than a Cygwin port. But I 
> suppose a Cygwin version would be useful if you wanted to test or 
> develop things that are destined for a 2.x/Unix machine. I also don't 
> know what's involved with compiling 2.x for Cygwin. Maybe after 1.x 
> and the modules are out...

My understanding is that the Cygwin port of Apache 1.x is also 
significantly slower than the native Apache 1.x but this didn't stop 
people from wanting a Cygwin version of 1.x. Or is there something in 
2.x (this thread MPM thing) that would make a Cygwin port of Apache 2.x 
much, much slower than the native one?

BTW: Thanks for volunteering for this. Does this mean that a Cygwin 
version of mod_php would be working again?
-- 
Jack Kevorkian for White House physician.


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/