Mailing List Archive

On Mar 17, 2021, at 3:40 PM, Sander Striker <striker@apache.org> wrote:
> If you are interested in seeing mod_perl remain an active project, and are able to help maintain and provide oversight, please respond in this thread indicating that you are interested in performing the duties of a PMC member[2].

I am, but I'm not currently a committer, fwiw.

https://github.com/esabol

Regards,
Ed

I am not interested in performing those duties but could you clarify how many active PMC members there are currently? It looks like the list at https://perl.apache.org/about/pmc.html is over 7 years out of date. It’s unclear how up-to-date the list at https://projects.apache.org/committee.html?perl is as well.



David Cook

Software Engineer

Prosentient Systems

Suite 7.03

6a Glen St

Milsons Point NSW 2061

Australia



Office: 02 9212 0899

Online: 02 8005 0595



From: Sander Striker <striker@apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, 18 March 2021 6:41 AM
To: dev@perl.apache.org; modperl@perl.apache.org
Subject: [DISCUSS] The future of mod_perl



Dear community members,

As projects mature, they will naturally reach a point where activity reduces to a level such that the project is no longer sustainable. At Apache, projects reach this stage when there are not at least 3 active PMC members providing oversight. Projects that reach this stage are usually placed in the Attic [1] or absorbed by another Apache project willing to manage its releases.

If you are interested in seeing mod_perl remain an active project, and are able to help maintain and provide oversight, please respond in this thread indicating that you are interested in performing the duties of a PMC member[2].


Cheers,

Sander Striker
Director, The Apache Software Foundation



[1] https://attic.apache.org/

[2] https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 at 19:40, Sander Striker <striker@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Dear community members,
>
> As projects mature, they will naturally reach a point where activity reduces to a level such that the project is no longer sustainable. At Apache, projects reach this stage when there are not at least 3 active PMC members providing oversight. Projects that reach this stage are usually placed in the Attic [1] or absorbed by another Apache project willing to manage its releases.
>
> If you are interested in seeing mod_perl remain an active project, and are able to help maintain and provide oversight, please respond in this thread indicating that you are interested in performing the duties of a PMC member[2].
>

I confirm again that I am still here and willing to participate and
sustain oversight of mod_perl as required.

When the roll call was done a month ago it's basically myself and Steve,
with Steve really being the only one that has much knowledge of the guts
of the project. Up until the last few months gozer (Phillippe Chaisson)
was at least around enough to file reports, but has been MIA a few
months. Some of the remainder of PMC list from the website are likely
still at least subbed to lists, but are for all intents and purposes
completely MIA or possibly formally retired from the project.

Adam

On 3/17/2021 6:52 PM, dcook@prosentient.com.au wrote:
>
> I am not interested in performing those duties but could you clarify
> how many active PMC members there are currently? It looks like the
> list at https://perl.apache.org/about/pmc.html
> <https://perl.apache.org/about/pmc.html> is over 7 years out of date.
> It’s unclear how up-to-date the list at
> https://projects.apache.org/committee.html?perl
> <https://projects.apache.org/committee.html?perl> is as well.
>
> David Cook
>
> Software Engineer
>
> Prosentient Systems
>
> Suite 7.03
>
> 6a Glen St
>
> Milsons Point NSW 2061
>
> Australia
>
> Office: 02 9212 0899
>
> Online: 02 8005 0595
>
> *From:*Sander Striker <striker@apache.org>
> *Sent:* Thursday, 18 March 2021 6:41 AM
> *To:* dev@perl.apache.org; modperl@perl.apache.org
> *Subject:* [DISCUSS] The future of mod_perl
>
> Dear community members,
>
> As projects mature, they will naturally reach a point where activity
> reduces to a level such that the project is no longer sustainable.  At
> Apache, projects reach this stage when there are not at least 3 active
> PMC members providing oversight. Projects that reach this stage are
> usually placed in the Attic [1] or absorbed by another Apache project
> willing to manage its releases.
>
> If you are interested in seeing mod_perl remain an active project, and
> are able to help maintain and provide oversight, please respond in
> this thread indicating that you are interested in performing the
> duties of a PMC member[2].
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Sander Striker
> Director, The Apache Software Foundation
>
> [1] https://attic.apache.org/ <https://attic.apache.org/>
>
> [2] https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html
> <https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html>
>

The projects current state is that no new development happening. This
isn't to say that new development shouldn't happen, but it isn't. Apache
and Perl both continue to move forward, and we are pretty lucky that the
design that Stas, Phillipe, Geoff, etc built mod_perl 2 under is
resilient enough to continue to despite the changes that both of these
projects have made.

So, if the goal of the PMC is to maintain the status quo, then there is
essentially no time required, aside from someone needing to file a
report every few months saying that nothing has happened, and there were
no releases. Things can only remain that way as long as there are no
security problems that affect mod_perl, and neither Apache or Perl do
anything that really breaks mod_perl.

Adam

On 3/17/2021 6:10 PM, Geoff Mottram wrote:
> All,
>
> I would certainly hate to see mod_perl no longer being maintained. I use
> it as a front-end for a library cataloging system that is very much
> alive, in-use and updated with recent HTML, CSS and JavaScript features.
> Rewriting this front-end in some other language would be a huge
> undertaking and would not provide much benefit because Apache + Perl +
> mod_perl not only do the job but do it extremely well.
>
> While I don't understand what type of time commitment would be required,
> I would be happy to add my name to the bottom of any list should others
> have a strong desire to hold such a position.
>
> Best,
>
> Geoff Mottram
>
> On 3/17/2021 3:40 PM, Sander Striker wrote:
>> Dear community members,
>>
>> As projects mature, they will naturally reach a point where activity
>> reduces to a level such that the project is no longer sustainable.  At
>> Apache, projects reach this stage when there are not at least 3 active
>> PMC members providing oversight. Projects that reach this stage are
>> usually placed in the Attic [1] or absorbed by another Apache project
>> willing to manage its releases.
>>
>> If you are interested in seeing mod_perl remain an active project, and
>> are able to help maintain and provide oversight, please respond in
>> this thread indicating that you are interested in performing the
>> duties of a PMC member[2].
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Sander Striker
>> Director, The Apache Software Foundation
>>
>> [1] https://attic.apache.org/ <https://attic.apache.org/>
>> [2] https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html
>> <https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
>

Not that I want to be the guy that says it sounds like we'll be pulling
the mod_perl plug at any time the right scenario arises, but is it
reasonable to have a discussion here on mod_perl alternatives inline
with the various means of using mod_perl from the low level means of
interfacing with the Apache server to the quick and dirty stuff
(ModPerl::PerlRun, I believe to keep Perl and modules in memory).

For those drawing the same conclusions from this thread as me, I've seen
mod_fcgid proposed as an alternative, but I haven't yet played with it.
Anyone with similar thoughts would ideally be looking for something that
doesn't require months of redeveloping to a proposed replacement to
mod_perl.

I like mod_perl and it does a good job for what I use it for, but if we
have no one developing, it sounds like we're waiting for the catalyst to
come along that puts and end to it. EG.. some future Apache
incompatibility.  I'd really like someone with mod_perl authority to
tell me I'm wrong, but my take on Adam's reply pretty much leaves me
with that conclusion. I don't see another way to draw a better conclusion.

Jim

On 3/17/2021 8:52 PM, Adam Prime wrote:
> The projects current state is that no new development happening. This
> isn't to say that new development shouldn't happen, but it isn't.
> Apache and Perl both continue to move forward, and we are pretty lucky
> that the design that Stas, Phillipe, Geoff, etc built mod_perl 2 under
> is resilient enough to continue to despite the changes that both of
> these projects have made.
>
> So, if the goal of the PMC is to maintain the status quo, then there
> is essentially no time required, aside from someone needing to file a
> report every few months saying that nothing has happened, and there
> were no releases. Things can only remain that way as long as there are
> no security problems that affect mod_perl, and neither Apache or Perl
> do anything that really breaks mod_perl.
>
> Adam
>
> On 3/17/2021 6:10 PM, Geoff Mottram wrote:
>> All,
>>
>> I would certainly hate to see mod_perl no longer being maintained. I
>> use it as a front-end for a library cataloging system that is very
>> much alive, in-use and updated with recent HTML, CSS and JavaScript
>> features. Rewriting this front-end in some other language would be a
>> huge undertaking and would not provide much benefit because Apache +
>> Perl + mod_perl not only do the job but do it extremely well.
>>
>> While I don't understand what type of time commitment would be
>> required, I would be happy to add my name to the bottom of any list
>> should others have a strong desire to hold such a position.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Geoff Mottram
>>
>> On 3/17/2021 3:40 PM, Sander Striker wrote:
>>> Dear community members,
>>>
>>> As projects mature, they will naturally reach a point where activity
>>> reduces to a level such that the project is no longer sustainable. 
>>> At Apache, projects reach this stage when there are not at least 3
>>> active PMC members providing oversight. Projects that reach this
>>> stage are usually placed in the Attic [1] or absorbed by another
>>> Apache project willing to manage its releases.
>>>
>>> If you are interested in seeing mod_perl remain an active project,
>>> and are able to help maintain and provide oversight, please respond
>>> in this thread indicating that you are interested in performing the
>>> duties of a PMC member[2].
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Sander Striker
>>> Director, The Apache Software Foundation
>>>
>>> [1] https://attic.apache.org/ <https://attic.apache.org/>
>>> [2] https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html
>>> <https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html>
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
>>

I think if you want to discuss alternatives, then a new thread would be
the place to do that.

With regards to plug being pulled, I think that it is up to the
community if, when, and how that happens. That's what the point of this
thread is. If there aren't people that are committed enough to the
project for whatever reason to step up and keep it from going to the
attic, then that's what will happen.

Adam



On 3/17/2021 9:50 PM, Jim Albert wrote:
> Not that I want to be the guy that says it sounds like we'll be pulling
> the mod_perl plug at any time the right scenario arises, but is it
> reasonable to have a discussion here on mod_perl alternatives inline
> with the various means of using mod_perl from the low level means of
> interfacing with the Apache server to the quick and dirty stuff
> (ModPerl::PerlRun, I believe to keep Perl and modules in memory).
>
> For those drawing the same conclusions from this thread as me, I've seen
> mod_fcgid proposed as an alternative, but I haven't yet played with it.
> Anyone with similar thoughts would ideally be looking for something that
> doesn't require months of redeveloping to a proposed replacement to
> mod_perl.
>
> I like mod_perl and it does a good job for what I use it for, but if we
> have no one developing, it sounds like we're waiting for the catalyst to
> come along that puts and end to it. EG.. some future Apache
> incompatibility.  I'd really like someone with mod_perl authority to
> tell me I'm wrong, but my take on Adam's reply pretty much leaves me
> with that conclusion. I don't see another way to draw a better conclusion.
>
> Jim
>

Happy to continue being a maintainer. Longer response coming soon :)

On Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 7:39 PM Adam Prime <adam.prime@utoronto.ca> wrote:

> I think if you want to discuss alternatives, then a new thread would be
> the place to do that.
>
> With regards to plug being pulled, I think that it is up to the
> community if, when, and how that happens. That's what the point of this
> thread is. If there aren't people that are committed enough to the
> project for whatever reason to step up and keep it from going to the
> attic, then that's what will happen.
>
> Adam
>
>
>
> On 3/17/2021 9:50 PM, Jim Albert wrote:
> > Not that I want to be the guy that says it sounds like we'll be pulling
> > the mod_perl plug at any time the right scenario arises, but is it
> > reasonable to have a discussion here on mod_perl alternatives inline
> > with the various means of using mod_perl from the low level means of
> > interfacing with the Apache server to the quick and dirty stuff
> > (ModPerl::PerlRun, I believe to keep Perl and modules in memory).
> >
> > For those drawing the same conclusions from this thread as me, I've seen
> > mod_fcgid proposed as an alternative, but I haven't yet played with it.
> > Anyone with similar thoughts would ideally be looking for something that
> > doesn't require months of redeveloping to a proposed replacement to
> > mod_perl.
> >
> > I like mod_perl and it does a good job for what I use it for, but if we
> > have no one developing, it sounds like we're waiting for the catalyst to
> > come along that puts and end to it. EG.. some future Apache
> > incompatibility. I'd really like someone with mod_perl authority to
> > tell me I'm wrong, but my take on Adam's reply pretty much leaves me
> > with that conclusion. I don't see another way to draw a better
> conclusion.
> >
> > Jim
> >
>

Sure... I'll start a new thread after I reply here.

I don't know about how apache projects are maintained and the logistics,
but there are two issues here.
Foremost... from your previous response you need a few people to step up
and file your described report indicating no new releases, but that's
not necessarily a developer and it doesn't sound involved. I expect
you'll get some volunteers.

However, aside from that is the bigger issue of you stated there are no
developers maintaining mod_perl. That's the big red flag in this. Should
some vulnerability be discovered or a future Apache release present some
compatibility issue... maybe someone steps up and provides a fix...
that's a big maybe.

Jim

On 3/17/2021 10:39 PM, Adam Prime wrote:
> I think if you want to discuss alternatives, then a new thread would
> be the place to do that.
>
> With regards to plug being pulled, I think that it is up to the
> community if, when, and how that happens. That's what the point of
> this thread is. If there aren't people that are committed enough to
> the project for whatever reason to step up and keep it from going to
> the attic, then that's what will happen.
>
> Adam
>
>
>
> On 3/17/2021 9:50 PM, Jim Albert wrote:
>> Not that I want to be the guy that says it sounds like we'll be
>> pulling the mod_perl plug at any time the right scenario arises, but
>> is it reasonable to have a discussion here on mod_perl alternatives
>> inline with the various means of using mod_perl from the low level
>> means of interfacing with the Apache server to the quick and dirty
>> stuff (ModPerl::PerlRun, I believe to keep Perl and modules in memory).
>>
>> For those drawing the same conclusions from this thread as me, I've
>> seen mod_fcgid proposed as an alternative, but I haven't yet played
>> with it. Anyone with similar thoughts would ideally be looking for
>> something that doesn't require months of redeveloping to a proposed
>> replacement to mod_perl.
>>
>> I like mod_perl and it does a good job for what I use it for, but if
>> we have no one developing, it sounds like we're waiting for the
>> catalyst to come along that puts and end to it. EG.. some future
>> Apache incompatibility.  I'd really like someone with mod_perl
>> authority to tell me I'm wrong, but my take on Adam's reply pretty
>> much leaves me with that conclusion. I don't see another way to draw
>> a better conclusion.
>>
>> Jim
>>

I didn't say there are no developers, I said there is no active
development happening. Steve Hay is a developer. Fred Moyer, who replied
to this thread earlier this evening, has also made significant
contributions to the project. I can dive into the C if I have to, to fix
bugs or review code, but I'm likely not going to have the time or skills
to make significant changes should they be required.

When significant bugs come up within mod_perl developers from httpd
project may also get brought in. That's what happened last time anyway
(https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2011-2767)

Adam

On 3/17/2021 11:46 PM, Jim Albert wrote:
> Sure... I'll start a new thread after I reply here.
>
> I don't know about how apache projects are maintained and the logistics,
> but there are two issues here.
> Foremost... from your previous response you need a few people to step up
> and file your described report indicating no new releases, but that's
> not necessarily a developer and it doesn't sound involved. I expect
> you'll get some volunteers.
>
> However, aside from that is the bigger issue of you stated there are no
> developers maintaining mod_perl. That's the big red flag in this. Should
> some vulnerability be discovered or a future Apache release present some
> compatibility issue... maybe someone steps up and provides a fix...
> that's a big maybe.
>
> Jim
>

Longer response here.

So I'm happy to be another active PMC member still involved. As
someone with a growing family, my time is limited, but not too much to
review and lend a +1 or feedback. I think that may be the case for a
few of the folks on this list. I'd like to see Steve Hay lead the
future of mod_perl project as I know a lot of the old guard have
personal duties now that take precedence.

mod_perl is not a new Apache project. It's approaching two decades,
close to the age of the Apache httpd project itself. It was a core
driver in developing my career in software, as well as many key
professional relationships associated there. I remember a *lot* of
weekends early in my career hacking on mod_perl for *fun* - the coding
was the reward, as well as the community feedback.

There are still many shops out there using mod_perl, but not much new
development, which makes sense. The project is in maintenance mode,
and there are developers willing to support needed releases as Adam
mentioned. If you are developing a new project, you should not use
mod_perl. But if you are maintaining legacy mod_perl infrastructure,
we will not leave you behind.

The open source project model has changed significantly, especially
over the last ten years. IMHO, while the ASF model was instrumental in
the rise of open source projects into commercial environments, more
recent approaches such as those supported by the Linux Foundation
(which is *definitely* more commercially supported, and reflected by
the platitude of industry sponsors and resources) have achieved
greater growth levels in the short term. Will they still be here in 20
years? No idea.

A takeaway from my reflections there is that the ASF can benefit from
a bit less formality in structure to keep up with the new kids on the
block. I'm just a mostly inactive PMC member, but I think it's clear
that the project rules are preventing us keeping up with the needed
leadership changes.

On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 8:02 PM Fred Moyer <fred@redhotpenguin.com> wrote:
>
> Happy to continue being a maintainer. Longer response coming soon :)
>
> On Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 7:39 PM Adam Prime <adam.prime@utoronto.ca> wrote:
>>
>> I think if you want to discuss alternatives, then a new thread would be
>> the place to do that.
>>
>> With regards to plug being pulled, I think that it is up to the
>> community if, when, and how that happens. That's what the point of this
>> thread is. If there aren't people that are committed enough to the
>> project for whatever reason to step up and keep it from going to the
>> attic, then that's what will happen.
>>
>> Adam
>>
>>
>>
>> On 3/17/2021 9:50 PM, Jim Albert wrote:
>> > Not that I want to be the guy that says it sounds like we'll be pulling
>> > the mod_perl plug at any time the right scenario arises, but is it
>> > reasonable to have a discussion here on mod_perl alternatives inline
>> > with the various means of using mod_perl from the low level means of
>> > interfacing with the Apache server to the quick and dirty stuff
>> > (ModPerl::PerlRun, I believe to keep Perl and modules in memory).
>> >
>> > For those drawing the same conclusions from this thread as me, I've seen
>> > mod_fcgid proposed as an alternative, but I haven't yet played with it.
>> > Anyone with similar thoughts would ideally be looking for something that
>> > doesn't require months of redeveloping to a proposed replacement to
>> > mod_perl.
>> >
>> > I like mod_perl and it does a good job for what I use it for, but if we
>> > have no one developing, it sounds like we're waiting for the catalyst to
>> > come along that puts and end to it. EG.. some future Apache
>> > incompatibility. I'd really like someone with mod_perl authority to
>> > tell me I'm wrong, but my take on Adam's reply pretty much leaves me
>> > with that conclusion. I don't see another way to draw a better conclusion.
>> >
>> > Jim
>> >

Thanks for the thorough response, Fred.
At some point before mod_perl stops having any development support would
you expect an End Of Life announcement with reasonable advanced notice?

I haven't followed discussion or announcements on other Apache modules
to know how modules normally reach their end. Is it structured or do
some just suddenly disappear?

Jim


On 3/18/2021 1:05 AM, Fred Moyer wrote:
> Longer response here.
>
> So I'm happy to be another active PMC member still involved. As
> someone with a growing family, my time is limited, but not too much to
> review and lend a +1 or feedback. I think that may be the case for a
> few of the folks on this list. I'd like to see Steve Hay lead the
> future of mod_perl project as I know a lot of the old guard have
> personal duties now that take precedence.
>
> mod_perl is not a new Apache project. It's approaching two decades,
> close to the age of the Apache httpd project itself. It was a core
> driver in developing my career in software, as well as many key
> professional relationships associated there. I remember a *lot* of
> weekends early in my career hacking on mod_perl for *fun* - the coding
> was the reward, as well as the community feedback.
>
> There are still many shops out there using mod_perl, but not much new
> development, which makes sense. The project is in maintenance mode,
> and there are developers willing to support needed releases as Adam
> mentioned. If you are developing a new project, you should not use
> mod_perl. But if you are maintaining legacy mod_perl infrastructure,
> we will not leave you behind.
>
> The open source project model has changed significantly, especially
> over the last ten years. IMHO, while the ASF model was instrumental in
> the rise of open source projects into commercial environments, more
> recent approaches such as those supported by the Linux Foundation
> (which is *definitely* more commercially supported, and reflected by
> the platitude of industry sponsors and resources) have achieved
> greater growth levels in the short term. Will they still be here in 20
> years? No idea.
>
> A takeaway from my reflections there is that the ASF can benefit from
> a bit less formality in structure to keep up with the new kids on the
> block. I'm just a mostly inactive PMC member, but I think it's clear
> that the project rules are preventing us keeping up with the needed
> leadership changes.
>
> On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 8:02 PM Fred Moyer <fred@redhotpenguin.com> wrote:
>> Happy to continue being a maintainer. Longer response coming soon :)
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 7:39 PM Adam Prime <adam.prime@utoronto.ca> wrote:
>>> I think if you want to discuss alternatives, then a new thread would be
>>> the place to do that.
>>>
>>> With regards to plug being pulled, I think that it is up to the
>>> community if, when, and how that happens. That's what the point of this
>>> thread is. If there aren't people that are committed enough to the
>>> project for whatever reason to step up and keep it from going to the
>>> attic, then that's what will happen.
>>>
>>> Adam
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/17/2021 9:50 PM, Jim Albert wrote:
>>>> Not that I want to be the guy that says it sounds like we'll be pulling
>>>> the mod_perl plug at any time the right scenario arises, but is it
>>>> reasonable to have a discussion here on mod_perl alternatives inline
>>>> with the various means of using mod_perl from the low level means of
>>>> interfacing with the Apache server to the quick and dirty stuff
>>>> (ModPerl::PerlRun, I believe to keep Perl and modules in memory).
>>>>
>>>> For those drawing the same conclusions from this thread as me, I've seen
>>>> mod_fcgid proposed as an alternative, but I haven't yet played with it.
>>>> Anyone with similar thoughts would ideally be looking for something that
>>>> doesn't require months of redeveloping to a proposed replacement to
>>>> mod_perl.
>>>>
>>>> I like mod_perl and it does a good job for what I use it for, but if we
>>>> have no one developing, it sounds like we're waiting for the catalyst to
>>>> come along that puts and end to it. EG.. some future Apache
>>>> incompatibility. I'd really like someone with mod_perl authority to
>>>> tell me I'm wrong, but my take on Adam's reply pretty much leaves me
>>>> with that conclusion. I don't see another way to draw a better conclusion.
>>>>
>>>> Jim
>>>>

Jim, mod_perl, while a module, is it's own Top Level Project at the
Apache Software Foundation.  So the Project Management Committee (PMC)
of the mod_perl project determines how things go. For other modules that
aren't their own project, they fall under the Apache HTTPD PMC's domain.

Right now, there has been concern that there isn't the minimum level of
support for a PMC at mod_perl that can suitably handle security concerns
and project decisions.  If there are 3 PMC members who +1 they are here
and can handle decisions and address security concerns in a timely
manner, then that's all this thread is trying to achieve.

The ASF as an organization follows a bottom-up organizational structure
so if the PMC can drive itself, the organization wants that to happen. 
It sounds like we might have 3 PMC +1's.

Regards,
KAM

On 3/18/2021 2:06 AM, Jim Albert wrote:
> Thanks for the thorough response, Fred.
> At some point before mod_perl stops having any development support
> would you expect an End Of Life announcement with reasonable advanced
> notice?
>
> I haven't followed discussion or announcements on other Apache modules
> to know how modules normally reach their end. Is it structured or do
> some just suddenly disappear?
>
> Jim
>
>
> On 3/18/2021 1:05 AM, Fred Moyer wrote:
>> Longer response here.
>>
>> So I'm happy to be another active PMC member still involved. As
>> someone with a growing family, my time is limited, but not too much to
>> review and lend a +1 or feedback. I think that may be the case for a
>> few of the folks on this list. I'd like to see Steve Hay lead the
>> future of mod_perl project as I know a lot of the old guard have
>> personal duties now that take precedence.
>>
>> mod_perl is not a new Apache project. It's approaching two decades,
>> close to the age of the Apache httpd project itself. It was a core
>> driver in developing my career in software, as well as many key
>> professional relationships associated there. I remember a *lot* of
>> weekends early in my career hacking on mod_perl for *fun* - the coding
>> was the reward, as well as the community feedback.
>>
>> There are still many shops out there using mod_perl, but not much new
>> development, which makes sense. The project is in maintenance mode,
>> and there are developers willing to support needed releases as Adam
>> mentioned. If you are developing a new project, you should not use
>> mod_perl. But if you are maintaining legacy mod_perl infrastructure,
>> we will not leave you behind.
>>
>> The open source project model has changed significantly, especially
>> over the last ten years. IMHO, while the ASF model was instrumental in
>> the rise of open source projects into commercial environments, more
>> recent approaches such as those supported by the Linux Foundation
>> (which is *definitely* more commercially supported, and reflected by
>> the platitude of industry sponsors and resources) have achieved
>> greater growth levels in the short term. Will they still be here in 20
>> years? No idea.
>>
>> A takeaway from my reflections there is that the ASF can benefit from
>> a bit less formality in structure to keep up with the new kids on the
>> block. I'm just a mostly inactive PMC member, but I think it's clear
>> that the project rules are preventing us keeping up with the needed
>> leadership changes.
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 8:02 PM Fred Moyer <fred@redhotpenguin.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Happy to continue being a maintainer. Longer response coming soon :)
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 7:39 PM Adam Prime <adam.prime@utoronto.ca>
>>> wrote:
>>>> I think if you want to discuss alternatives, then a new thread
>>>> would be
>>>> the place to do that.
>>>>
>>>> With regards to plug being pulled, I think that it is up to the
>>>> community if, when, and how that happens. That's what the point of
>>>> this
>>>> thread is. If there aren't people that are committed enough to the
>>>> project for whatever reason to step up and keep it from going to the
>>>> attic, then that's what will happen.
>>>>
>>>> Adam
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 3/17/2021 9:50 PM, Jim Albert wrote:
>>>>> Not that I want to be the guy that says it sounds like we'll be
>>>>> pulling
>>>>> the mod_perl plug at any time the right scenario arises, but is it
>>>>> reasonable to have a discussion here on mod_perl alternatives inline
>>>>> with the various means of using mod_perl from the low level means of
>>>>> interfacing with the Apache server to the quick and dirty stuff
>>>>> (ModPerl::PerlRun, I believe to keep Perl and modules in memory).
>>>>>
>>>>> For those drawing the same conclusions from this thread as me,
>>>>> I've seen
>>>>> mod_fcgid proposed as an alternative, but I haven't yet played
>>>>> with it.
>>>>> Anyone with similar thoughts would ideally be looking for
>>>>> something that
>>>>> doesn't require months of redeveloping to a proposed replacement to
>>>>> mod_perl.
>>>>>
>>>>> I like mod_perl and it does a good job for what I use it for, but
>>>>> if we
>>>>> have no one developing, it sounds like we're waiting for the
>>>>> catalyst to
>>>>> come along that puts and end to it. EG.. some future Apache
>>>>> incompatibility.  I'd really like someone with mod_perl authority to
>>>>> tell me I'm wrong, but my take on Adam's reply pretty much leaves me
>>>>> with that conclusion. I don't see another way to draw a better
>>>>> conclusion.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jim
>>>>>
>
--




*Kevin A. McGrail*
/CEO Emeritus/
*Peregrine Computer Consultants Corporation*
+1.703.798.0171 kmcgrail@pccc.com
 https://pccc.com/ https://raptoremailsecurity.com

10311 Cascade Lane, Fairfax, Virginia 22032-2357 USA

On Thu, 18 Mar 2021 at 05:07, Fred Moyer <fred@redhotpenguin.com> wrote:
>
> Longer response here.
>
> So I'm happy to be another active PMC member still involved. As
> someone with a growing family, my time is limited, but not too much to
> review and lend a +1 or feedback. I think that may be the case for a
> few of the folks on this list. I'd like to see Steve Hay lead the
> future of mod_perl project as I know a lot of the old guard have
> personal duties now that take precedence.
>

Thanks Fred and Adam for stepping up. I'm happy to keep pushing out
new releases as necessary, and also providing Win32 builds of them,
and filing the reports too if Philippe is no longer around to do that,
but all my experience is on Windows, so I'm limited in what I can
achieve. I also don't have that much knowledge of the guts of
mod_perl, though I am a full-time C/C++ developer so am capable of
getting into it more if required.

I'm only really talking about bug fixing and general maintenance
duties (hopefully fixing any security issues and other bug reports,
and keeping up with the latest Apache/Perl changes). I'm not actively
doing any development, and if big changes are required for a new
Apache/Perl release then we could come unstuck. For the Apache 2.4
change there were quite a few changes necessary, and we were fortunate
that other developers stepped in to assist (notably Torsten Foertsch
and Jan Kaluza). If similar large-scale changes are required again in
the future then we are somewhat dependent on gaining assistance again,
especially where anything Unix/Linux-specified is involved.

Even now we have a build-breaking issue with the upcoming perl 5.34.0
release, which I'm not certain of a fix for. See
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r515522504d5245f83488c096832419950d6d6e93e9ff11f55055953e%40%3Cdev.perl.apache.org%3E
Things look okay so far on Windows, but I'm not able to test anything
on other OSes so the other MPMs haven't been tried at all. We do
really need someone able to do something similar to what I'm doing but
on Unix/Linux, otherwise we're in danger of ending up with things
being broken there.

I am willing, but I am not sure how much expertise I have to the
project. I can code in C and C++ and Perl ,and used modperl for
decades, but I have never got into the guts of it.



On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 08:43:25PM -0400, Adam Prime wrote:
> When the roll call was done a month ago it's basically myself and
> Steve, with Steve really being the only one that has much knowledge
> of the guts of the project. Up until the last few months gozer
> (Phillippe Chaisson) was at least around enough to file reports, but
> has been MIA a few months. Some of the remainder of PMC list from
> the website are likely still at least subbed to lists, but are for
> all intents and purposes completely MIA or possibly formally retired
> from the project.
>
> Adam
>
> On 3/17/2021 6:52 PM, dcook@prosentient.com.au wrote:
> >
> >I am not interested in performing those duties but could you
> >clarify how many active PMC members there are currently? It looks
> >like the list at https://perl.apache.org/about/pmc.html
> ><https://perl.apache.org/about/pmc.html> is over 7 years out of
> >date. It’s unclear how up-to-date the list at
> >https://projects.apache.org/committee.html?perl
> ><https://projects.apache.org/committee.html?perl> is as well.
> >
> >David Cook
> >
> >Software Engineer
> >
> >Prosentient Systems
> >
> >Suite 7.03
> >
> >6a Glen St
> >
> >Milsons Point NSW 2061
> >
> >Australia
> >
> >Office: 02 9212 0899
> >
> >Online: 02 8005 0595
> >
> >*From:*Sander Striker <striker@apache.org>
> >*Sent:* Thursday, 18 March 2021 6:41 AM
> >*To:* dev@perl.apache.org; modperl@perl.apache.org
> >*Subject:* [DISCUSS] The future of mod_perl
> >
> >Dear community members,
> >
> >As projects mature, they will naturally reach a point where
> >activity reduces to a level such that the project is no longer
> >sustainable.  At Apache, projects reach this stage when there are
> >not at least 3 active PMC members providing oversight. Projects
> >that reach this stage are usually placed in the Attic [1] or
> >absorbed by another Apache project willing to manage its releases.
> >
> >If you are interested in seeing mod_perl remain an active project,
> >and are able to help maintain and provide oversight, please
> >respond in this thread indicating that you are interested in
> >performing the duties of a PMC member[2].
> >
> >
> >Cheers,
> >
> >Sander Striker
> >Director, The Apache Software Foundation
> >
> >[1] https://attic.apache.org/ <https://attic.apache.org/>
> >
> >[2] https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html
> ><https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html>
> >

--
So many immigrant groups have swept through our town
that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, reaches mythological
proportions in the mind of the world - RI Safir 1998
http://www.mrbrklyn.com

DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 2002
http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
http://www2.mrbrklyn.com/resources - Unpublished Archive
http://www.coinhangout.com - coins!
http://www.brooklyn-living.com

Being so tracked is for FARM ANIMALS and extermination camps,
but incompatible with living as a free human being. -RI Safir 2013

On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 09:50:05PM -0400, Jim Albert wrote:
> Not that I want to be the guy that says it sounds like we'll be
> pulling the mod_perl plug at any time the right scenario arises, but
> is it reasonable to have a discussion here on mod_perl alternatives
> inline with the various means of using mod_perl from the low level
> means of interfacing with the Apache server to the quick and dirty
> stuff (ModPerl::PerlRun, I believe to keep Perl and modules in
> memory).
>

It is not that simple. I have a website that I have maintained on
mod_perl and embperl since 1992. It is quite massive and moving it is
frankly not reasonable. modperl and embperl has been remarkably
flexible and resilent over time and I don't see any reason why it can't
be maintained and essentially adapted to the latest apache source.

When it dies. my website wil for all practocality be dead.


> For those drawing the same conclusions from this thread as me, I've
> seen mod_fcgid proposed as an alternative, but I haven't yet played
> with it. Anyone with similar thoughts would ideally be looking for
> something that doesn't require months of redeveloping to a proposed
> replacement to mod_perl.
>
> I like mod_perl and it does a good job for what I use it for, but if
> we have no one developing, it sounds like we're waiting for the
> catalyst to come along that puts and end to it. EG.. some future
> Apache incompatibility.? I'd really like someone with mod_perl
> authority to tell me I'm wrong, but my take on Adam's reply pretty
> much leaves me with that conclusion. I don't see another way to draw
> a better conclusion.
>
> Jim
>
> On 3/17/2021 8:52 PM, Adam Prime wrote:
> >The projects current state is that no new development happening.
> >This isn't to say that new development shouldn't happen, but it
> >isn't. Apache and Perl both continue to move forward, and we are
> >pretty lucky that the design that Stas, Phillipe, Geoff, etc built
> >mod_perl 2 under is resilient enough to continue to despite the
> >changes that both of these projects have made.
> >
> >So, if the goal of the PMC is to maintain the status quo, then
> >there is essentially no time required, aside from someone needing
> >to file a report every few months saying that nothing has
> >happened, and there were no releases. Things can only remain that
> >way as long as there are no security problems that affect
> >mod_perl, and neither Apache or Perl do anything that really
> >breaks mod_perl.
> >
> >Adam
> >
> >On 3/17/2021 6:10 PM, Geoff Mottram wrote:
> >>All,
> >>
> >>I would certainly hate to see mod_perl no longer being
> >>maintained. I use it as a front-end for a library cataloging
> >>system that is very much alive, in-use and updated with recent
> >>HTML, CSS and JavaScript features. Rewriting this front-end in
> >>some other language would be a huge undertaking and would not
> >>provide much benefit because Apache + Perl + mod_perl not only
> >>do the job but do it extremely well.
> >>
> >>While I don't understand what type of time commitment would be
> >>required, I would be happy to add my name to the bottom of any
> >>list should others have a strong desire to hold such a position.
> >>
> >>Best,
> >>
> >>Geoff Mottram
> >>
> >>On 3/17/2021 3:40 PM, Sander Striker wrote:
> >>>Dear community?members,
> >>>
> >>>As projects mature, they will naturally reach a point where
> >>>activity reduces to a level such that the project is no longer
> >>>sustainable.? At Apache, projects reach this stage when there
> >>>are not at least 3 active PMC members providing oversight.
> >>>Projects that reach this stage are usually placed in the
> >>>Attic?[1] or absorbed by another Apache project willing to
> >>>manage its releases.
> >>>
> >>>If you are interested in seeing mod_perl remain an active
> >>>project, and are able to help maintain and provide oversight,
> >>>please respond in this thread indicating that you are
> >>>interested in performing the duties of a PMC member[2].
> >>>
> >>>Cheers,
> >>>
> >>>Sander Striker
> >>>Director, The Apache Software Foundation
> >>>
> >>>[1] https://attic.apache.org/ <https://attic.apache.org/>
> >>>[2] https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html
> >>><https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html>
> >>>
> >>
> >>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
> >>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
> >>
>
>

--
So many immigrant groups have swept through our town
that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, reaches mythological
proportions in the mind of the world - RI Safir 1998
http://www.mrbrklyn.com

DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 2002
http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
http://www2.mrbrklyn.com/resources - Unpublished Archive
http://www.coinhangout.com - coins!
http://www.brooklyn-living.com

Being so tracked is for FARM ANIMALS and extermination camps,
but incompatible with living as a free human being. -RI Safir 2013

Hello,
I am interested in volunteering (performing duties of a PMC member) some
of my time/knowledge to keep this project up and running.

Nedzad Hrnjica
nedzad@nedzadhrnjica.com


On 2021-03-17 20:40, Sander Striker wrote:
> Dear community members,
>
> As projects mature, they will naturally reach a point where activity
> reduces to a level such that the project is no longer sustainable. At
> Apache, projects reach this stage when there are not at least 3 active
> PMC members providing oversight. Projects that reach this stage are
> usually placed in the Attic [1] or absorbed by another Apache project
> willing to manage its releases.
>
> If you are interested in seeing mod_perl remain an active project, and
> are able to help maintain and provide oversight, please respond in
> this thread indicating that you are interested in performing the
> duties of a PMC member[2].
>
> Cheers,
>
> Sander Striker
> Director, The Apache Software Foundation
>
> [1] https://attic.apache.org/ [1]
>
> [2] https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html
>
>
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1] https://attic.apache.org/

Isnt it interesting to know how many, happy, users modperl has?

Michel

> Op 18 mrt. 2021 om 06:07 heeft Fred Moyer <fred@redhotpenguin.com> het volgende geschreven:
>
> ?Longer response here.
>
> So I'm happy to be another active PMC member still involved. As
> someone with a growing family, my time is limited, but not too much to
> review and lend a +1 or feedback. I think that may be the case for a
> few of the folks on this list. I'd like to see Steve Hay lead the
> future of mod_perl project as I know a lot of the old guard have
> personal duties now that take precedence.
>
> mod_perl is not a new Apache project. It's approaching two decades,
> close to the age of the Apache httpd project itself. It was a core
> driver in developing my career in software, as well as many key
> professional relationships associated there. I remember a *lot* of
> weekends early in my career hacking on mod_perl for *fun* - the coding
> was the reward, as well as the community feedback.
>
> There are still many shops out there using mod_perl, but not much new
> development, which makes sense. The project is in maintenance mode,
> and there are developers willing to support needed releases as Adam
> mentioned. If you are developing a new project, you should not use
> mod_perl. But if you are maintaining legacy mod_perl infrastructure,
> we will not leave you behind.
>
> The open source project model has changed significantly, especially
> over the last ten years. IMHO, while the ASF model was instrumental in
> the rise of open source projects into commercial environments, more
> recent approaches such as those supported by the Linux Foundation
> (which is *definitely* more commercially supported, and reflected by
> the platitude of industry sponsors and resources) have achieved
> greater growth levels in the short term. Will they still be here in 20
> years? No idea.
>
> A takeaway from my reflections there is that the ASF can benefit from
> a bit less formality in structure to keep up with the new kids on the
> block. I'm just a mostly inactive PMC member, but I think it's clear
> that the project rules are preventing us keeping up with the needed
> leadership changes.
>
>> On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 8:02 PM Fred Moyer <fred@redhotpenguin.com> wrote:
>>
>> Happy to continue being a maintainer. Longer response coming soon :)
>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 7:39 PM Adam Prime <adam.prime@utoronto.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>> I think if you want to discuss alternatives, then a new thread would be
>>> the place to do that.
>>>
>>> With regards to plug being pulled, I think that it is up to the
>>> community if, when, and how that happens. That's what the point of this
>>> thread is. If there aren't people that are committed enough to the
>>> project for whatever reason to step up and keep it from going to the
>>> attic, then that's what will happen.
>>>
>>> Adam
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/17/2021 9:50 PM, Jim Albert wrote:
>>>> Not that I want to be the guy that says it sounds like we'll be pulling
>>>> the mod_perl plug at any time the right scenario arises, but is it
>>>> reasonable to have a discussion here on mod_perl alternatives inline
>>>> with the various means of using mod_perl from the low level means of
>>>> interfacing with the Apache server to the quick and dirty stuff
>>>> (ModPerl::PerlRun, I believe to keep Perl and modules in memory).
>>>>
>>>> For those drawing the same conclusions from this thread as me, I've seen
>>>> mod_fcgid proposed as an alternative, but I haven't yet played with it.
>>>> Anyone with similar thoughts would ideally be looking for something that
>>>> doesn't require months of redeveloping to a proposed replacement to
>>>> mod_perl.
>>>>
>>>> I like mod_perl and it does a good job for what I use it for, but if we
>>>> have no one developing, it sounds like we're waiting for the catalyst to
>>>> come along that puts and end to it. EG.. some future Apache
>>>> incompatibility. I'd really like someone with mod_perl authority to
>>>> tell me I'm wrong, but my take on Adam's reply pretty much leaves me
>>>> with that conclusion. I don't see another way to draw a better conclusion.
>>>>
>>>> Jim
>>>>

Sounds like mod_perl would benefit from using some CI tools. Looks like ASF provides some via https://ci.apache.org/?

David Cook
Software Engineer
Prosentient Systems
Suite 7.03
6a Glen St
Milsons Point NSW 2061
Australia

Office: 02 9212 0899
Online: 02 8005 0595

-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Hay <steve.m.hay@googlemail.com>
Sent: Thursday, 18 March 2021 9:06 PM
To: Fred Moyer <fred@redhotpenguin.com>
Cc: Adam Prime <adam.prime@utoronto.ca>; mod_perl list <modperl@perl.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] The future of mod_perl

On Thu, 18 Mar 2021 at 05:07, Fred Moyer <fred@redhotpenguin.com> wrote:
>
> Longer response here.
>
> So I'm happy to be another active PMC member still involved. As
> someone with a growing family, my time is limited, but not too much to
> review and lend a +1 or feedback. I think that may be the case for a
> few of the folks on this list. I'd like to see Steve Hay lead the
> future of mod_perl project as I know a lot of the old guard have
> personal duties now that take precedence.
>

Thanks Fred and Adam for stepping up. I'm happy to keep pushing out new releases as necessary, and also providing Win32 builds of them, and filing the reports too if Philippe is no longer around to do that, but all my experience is on Windows, so I'm limited in what I can achieve. I also don't have that much knowledge of the guts of mod_perl, though I am a full-time C/C++ developer so am capable of getting into it more if required.

I'm only really talking about bug fixing and general maintenance duties (hopefully fixing any security issues and other bug reports, and keeping up with the latest Apache/Perl changes). I'm not actively doing any development, and if big changes are required for a new Apache/Perl release then we could come unstuck. For the Apache 2.4 change there were quite a few changes necessary, and we were fortunate that other developers stepped in to assist (notably Torsten Foertsch and Jan Kaluza). If similar large-scale changes are required again in the future then we are somewhat dependent on gaining assistance again, especially where anything Unix/Linux-specified is involved.

Even now we have a build-breaking issue with the upcoming perl 5.34.0 release, which I'm not certain of a fix for. See https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r515522504d5245f83488c096832419950d6d6e93e9ff11f55055953e%40%3Cdev.perl.apache.org%3E
Things look okay so far on Windows, but I'm not able to test anything on other OSes so the other MPMs haven't been tried at all. We do really need someone able to do something similar to what I'm doing but on Unix/Linux, otherwise we're in danger of ending up with things being broken there.

Hello,

> On 18 Mar 2021, at 23:05, Michel Jansen <mailmaster@web-ict.com> wrote:
>
> Isnt it interesting to know how many, happy, users modperl has?

Yes, count me in. Out of curiosity I tried to search for a mod_perl alternative for our applications, but have not found anything which could replace it. It might be old, but it is working. And it does this very well.
Even though I have not the knowledge to participate in the development process, I would be willing to invest more time into testing potential pre-releases or bug fixes.

Best regards

Matthias Schmitt

magic moving pixel s.a.
23, Avenue Grande-Duchesse Charlotte
L-3441 Dudelange
Luxembourg
Phone: +352 54 75 75
http://www.mmp.lu

I am also still around and keeping an eye on things, maybe from afar a little, but still here and invested.

For myself, I find that one of the challenges in filing board reports is having to effectively report more or less nothing of value, on a schedule that’s just long and infrequent enough to keep overlooking it, basically.

Sent from the depths of my mind on an iPhone

> On Mar 17, 2021, at 15:40, Sander Striker <striker@apache.org> wrote:
>

> ?
> Dear community members,
>
> As projects mature, they will naturally reach a point where activity reduces to a level such that the project is no longer sustainable. At Apache, projects reach this stage when there are not at least 3 active PMC members providing oversight. Projects that reach this stage are usually placed in the Attic [1] or absorbed by another Apache project willing to manage its releases.
>
> If you are interested in seeing mod_perl remain an active project, and are able to help maintain and provide oversight, please respond in this thread indicating that you are interested in performing the duties of a PMC member[2].
>
> Cheers,
>
> Sander Striker
> Director, The Apache Software Foundation
>
> [1] https://attic.apache.org/
> [2] https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html
>

On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 08:40:33PM +0100, Sander Striker wrote:
> Dear community members,
>
> As projects mature, they will naturally reach a point where activity
> reduces to a level such that the project is no longer sustainable. At
> Apache, projects reach this stage when there are not at least 3 active PMC
> members providing oversight. Projects that reach this stage are usually
> placed in the Attic [1] or absorbed by another Apache project willing to
> manage its releases.
>

I don't know that I would be good as a PMC. But I do want mod_perl to
continue.

I do have some general questions for everyone.

Other than maintaining and security updates, what does everything think
about the following issues:

What is missing or too hard to do in mod_perl?
Some of this could be very easy or very hard to code.
Maybe just some small fix no one ever did or finished.

What is missing in documentation?
The website isn't very good. The man pages are decent.
Example code is pretty much non-existent.
Putting tons of examples in man pages, IMHO, is a bad idea.
But by not having any examples across the board, mod_perl is very
difficult for new users to grasp in it's full depths. Which is where all
of the goodies are at. Alternatives to mod_perl are just as good if you
can't fully reach into it completely.

I'm actually pretty passionate about this.
I realize that there is a lot of proprietary code out there that cannot
be directly released, but the different tasks that are solved ought to
be OK to talk about.
Then, some solutions could be posted to the list and/or elsewhere.

Small, medium and large websites are three different kinds of problems.
Some needs are identical, but very different as far as volume.
Independent developers working for companies by contract also exist.

I'm willing to put in plenty of work on this. I'll learn tons of new
things and that means I'll be able to do many things better.
I think that making the effort of learning mod_perl a breeze is probably
the best form of advocacy.

I don't see myself as being able to do any coding in the guts of
mod_perl.


What other things need doing? Coding, basic documentation, and a fuller
documentation that teaches mod_perl beyond the throw in your old cgi code.

If anyone wants to talk about some serious documentation efforts, let's
start a new thread.

Thanks,
Chris

> What is missing or too hard to do in mod_perl?
1) Using an MPM other than prefork
2) Websockets

On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 2:57 PM Chris <cpb_mod_perl@bennettconstruction.us>
wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 08:40:33PM +0100, Sander Striker wrote:
> > Dear community members,
> >
> > As projects mature, they will naturally reach a point where activity
> > reduces to a level such that the project is no longer sustainable. At
> > Apache, projects reach this stage when there are not at least 3 active
> PMC
> > members providing oversight. Projects that reach this stage are usually
> > placed in the Attic [1] or absorbed by another Apache project willing to
> > manage its releases.
> >
>
> I don't know that I would be good as a PMC. But I do want mod_perl to
> continue.
>
> I do have some general questions for everyone.
>
> Other than maintaining and security updates, what does everything think
> about the following issues:
>
> What is missing or too hard to do in mod_perl?
> Some of this could be very easy or very hard to code.
> Maybe just some small fix no one ever did or finished.
>
> What is missing in documentation?
> The website isn't very good. The man pages are decent.
> Example code is pretty much non-existent.
> Putting tons of examples in man pages, IMHO, is a bad idea.
> But by not having any examples across the board, mod_perl is very
> difficult for new users to grasp in it's full depths. Which is where all
> of the goodies are at. Alternatives to mod_perl are just as good if you
> can't fully reach into it completely.
>
> I'm actually pretty passionate about this.
> I realize that there is a lot of proprietary code out there that cannot
> be directly released, but the different tasks that are solved ought to
> be OK to talk about.
> Then, some solutions could be posted to the list and/or elsewhere.
>
> Small, medium and large websites are three different kinds of problems.
> Some needs are identical, but very different as far as volume.
> Independent developers working for companies by contract also exist.
>
> I'm willing to put in plenty of work on this. I'll learn tons of new
> things and that means I'll be able to do many things better.
> I think that making the effort of learning mod_perl a breeze is probably
> the best form of advocacy.
>
> I don't see myself as being able to do any coding in the guts of
> mod_perl.
>
>
> What other things need doing? Coding, basic documentation, and a fuller
> documentation that teaches mod_perl beyond the throw in your old cgi code.
>
> If anyone wants to talk about some serious documentation efforts, let's
> start a new thread.
>
> Thanks,
> Chris
>
>
>

--
John Dunlap
*CTO | Lariat *

*Direct:*
*john@lariat.co <john@lariat.co>*

*Customer Service:*
877.268.6667
support@lariat.co

Hi.

I am a long-term (30+) user of Apache/mod_perl (and perl), but at the application level,
not at the committer or PMC level.
May I therefor respectfully contribute an "outsider's" point of view ?

I believe that mod_perl (like perl itself) suffers from the fact that it is just "too
good", in the sense that it do what its (existing and good) documentation says, it works,
there are few "problems" (and certainly no urgent one), and in consequence there is not
much said about it (and little to do or to say about it), despite the fact that it may be
much used (an aspect that is little investigated, and of which we consequently know very
little).
For the same reason, expressions like "managing its releases" or "number of
committers/commits" lack a bit of meaning, if such releases or commits are mostly
infrequent and not really required (as in, for example, "for fixing bugs" or "to maintain
compatibility with the lastest Apache httpd release").

In that sense, moving a project such as Apache/mod_perl "to the Attic" sounds a bit unfair
and derogatory (as per associations with "forgotten", "historical", spiderwebs etc.),
and may even have the unfortunate result of discouraging "young blood" to even look at it.

If anything, projects of that quality should probably gain their own distinction. (I would
suggest "Emeritus" if that term itself didn't somehow sound like "retired").

So, considering that Apache is a widely respected organisation whose "stamp" on software
matters a lot, and considering that despite its age it is still dynamic and all, how about
introducing a new classification for such outstanding mature projects, and selecting
mod_perl as its first member ?
Like, "Apache Patrimony Projects" ?

By the way, what about "libapreq2", of which I just saw the annoucement of a new release.
Is that part of mod_perl, or a separate project ? (it seems like at least a quite close
relative to mod_perl - and I use both - that's why I'm asking).


On 20.03.2021 15:37, Philippe Chiasson wrote:
> I am also still around and keeping an eye on things, maybe from afar a little, but still
> here and invested.
>
> For myself, I find that one of the challenges in filing board reports is having to
> effectively report more or less nothing of value, on a schedule that’s just long and
> infrequent enough to keep overlooking it, basically.
>
> Sent from the depths of my mind on an iPhone
>
>> On Mar 17, 2021, at 15:40, Sander Striker <striker@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>
>> ?
>> Dear community members,
>>
>> As projects mature, they will naturally reach a point where activity reduces to a level
>> such that the project is no longer sustainable.  At Apache, projects reach this stage
>> when there are not at least 3 active PMC members providing oversight. Projects that
>> reach this stage are usually placed in the Attic [1] or absorbed by another Apache
>> project willing to manage its releases.
>>
>> If you are interested in seeing mod_perl remain an active project, and are able to help
>> maintain and provide oversight, please respond in this thread indicating that you are
>> interested in performing the duties of a PMC member[2].
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Sander Striker
>> Director, The Apache Software Foundation
>>
>> [1] https://attic.apache.org/ <https://attic.apache.org/>
>> [2] https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html <https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html>
>>