Created attachment 418020 [details] httpd-source.patch Hello, Joe Orton. Some time ago you refuse request add support if ITK MPM ( https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479575 ). Now I ready do that itself. I'm very appreciate you work, and to do not do one job twice, I ask add httpd-source subpackage. Just similar, for example xorg-x11-server-source. After apply all patches in main httpd package and do all hacks, you just pack it as separate package. That's all. Then I add it as BuildRequires dependency and build against my httpd-itk. This package will go through standafd review request. All other work to support this MPM will related to me. And now it ready, if you interesting - http://hubbitus.net.ru/rpm/EL5/httpd-itk/ Furthermore, it allow in the future build other MPMs like peruser etc. To do not make additional work for you by this request, I made patch against rawhide spec of httpd, please revisit. With best wishes, Pavel Alexeev.
No, I'm not adding this as another way to circumvent working with upstream. All previous arguments still stand. Adding this patch is not zero cost. 2.4 will support dynamically loaded MPMs so it should be possible to build third-party MPMs then. The best you can do is to work with both the ITK author and httpd upstream to get ITK building and working as a third-party module DSO built against the trunk.
> Adding this patch is not zero cost. It will my work and I ready pay this cost! Also as thousands users. I only ask you provide httpd-source package for convenient, nothing more! It around 2 lines in your spec file and can't have any side effect.
Inflating the size of the distribution is not without cost. Please do not re-open this bug. I am not adding stuff to Fedora specifically to allow people to work around upstream.
(In reply to comment #3) > Inflating the size of the distribution is not without cost. And for that you do things to double more and increase size of distribution even more?? Strange logic. > Please do not re-open this bug. I am not adding stuff to Fedora specifically > to allow people to work around upstream. About who you are speak? I plan work with 2 upstream, with or without you small help.