Re: [Slashcode-general] Jumping in here late ... Slashcode is Dead ...

[Larson, T. E. <TEL...@we...>]

> > I think it comes down to "why deploy two servers if you can do
> > one?"  Most people these days, if they're going Apache, are going
> > Apache2.  Apache isn't exactly lightweight.  So deploying a second
> > heavy server just to run slash seems overkill for something that
> > ought to be much more straightforward.  That's my take on it.
> 
> I hear you, but that is not a problem for Slashdot, of course.  So the
> question for *us* -- considering resources we'd have to devote to make
> a change -- is of what's inherently better about Apache2 that would
> justify the change for us.

So it's really, "Why should Slashdot (since that's who is putting resources into it) do this work for nothing?"  That leads to the question, how open are slash developers "on the inside" to input "from the outside"?  If someone were to do the heavy lifting, would it be accepted?  Would /. conceivably switch over to the new version and run Apache2?


Tim