apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Doug MacEachern <do...@covalent.net>
Subject Re: Moving stuff from server/util_* into apr-util?
Date Thu, 17 May 2001 17:17:45 GMT
On Wed, 16 May 2001, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:

> Hi gang,
> I keep running into files (server/util_date.c, server/util_uri.c) that
> can be extremely useful outside of httpd-2.0.  What would people think
> about trying to move some of that code inside of apr-util?

i would very much like to see this happen.
apr-util/STATUS has this item:
 * populate src/uri from Apache

but there is plenty more that would be useful, such as the date stuff.
> mod_mbox has a private copy of util_date.c because it doesn't rely on
> being inside of the httpd-2.0 tree - think of the standalone APR-based
> programs that generate the index (I also added some fixes and made the
> date parsing more featureful).  mod_mbox.c has to be in httpd-2.0, but
> the other mod_mbox code should probably live in apr-util (if it is ever
> committed into CVS).  I've now come across a use for util_uri.c outside
> of httpd-2.0 (we're writing a load test tool here).  Again, I've created
> a private copy of the files and de-httpdified it.  It isn't too painful,
> but I'm starting to see the same pattern over and over again.

i'm in the same boat (private copy of util_uri.c and util_date.c), would
be thrilled to get out of it.
> A lot of work would have to be done to move this stuff into apr-util
> (try to remove any of the dependencies on the httpd-2.0 structures,
> symbol renames, API changes, build changes, etc.), but I think it is
> feasible.  I can do this in my local tree without problems, but since I
> don't have commit access, my work would go to waste unless someone with
> commit access in both APR and httpd-2.0 thinks this change (and all of
> the patches to implement this are of sufficient quality) is a good idea
> and would commit the changes.  This isn't something I want to start
> unless we agree this is the way to go.

i am willing to help test/commit/etc.
> This would lead to some big patches (symbol renames, etc.), but I think
> that in the long run a bunch of those files should probably be kicked
> into apr-util - it just seems the "Right Thing" to do though.  And, not
> everything would be feasible to move in (util_filter.c?), but there are
> probably enough things that are isolated enough to make this migration
> worthwhile.

i agree, the effort should be well worth it for the long run.

> Maybe I'm wrong and there are lots of reasons this hasn't been done
> before...  -- justin

i think the only reason it hasn't been done is because it will be somewhat
painful.  maybe it would be worthwhile to first come up with a list of
canidate functions/structures to move from httpd to apr-util.

View raw message