Been using 2 for some time now. Works great. :) Works will with Dynamic
Virtual hosts as well. :)

Brian Grayless

On Mon, 2004-04-05 at 08:44, Brian Densmore wrote:
> Well, I can't speak to apache 2. I have yet to try it.
> Last I looked around many people considered it too new or
> not prime time ready. That was some time ago though.
> I like 1.3.x. It's stable, although the apache site is 
> running on apache 2 and has been for some time. Someday,
> I suspect I will have to jump to apache 2. There is a
> change in philosophy from 1.3 to 2 (IIRC). The 
> configuration files are different from what I understand.
> But I have noticed that the 1.3 is moving in the direction of 
> preparing people for the 2.x move. So a newer 1.3 install should
> upgrade without much headache. If you just want to learn
> I would go with 1.3, as it is an established stable build.
> 
> $0.02,
> Brian
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Adrian Gordinier [mailto:adrian@gordinier.net]
> > Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2004 8:35 PM
> > To: kclug@kclug.org
> > Subject: Apache Question
> > 
> > 
> > I was wondering what you all thought about the merits of using either
> > apache2 or apache 1.3-something. I am simply wanting to learn PHP and
> > setup fairly simple web pages. No enterprise stuff here. Any advise is
> > much appreciated.
> > 
> > Adrian Gordinier
> > adrian@gordinier.net 
> > 
> > 
>