httpd-apreq-cvs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From j...@apache.org
Subject cvs commit: httpd-apreq-2 STATUS
Date Mon, 05 Jul 2004 17:48:06 GMT
joes        2004/07/05 10:48:06

  Modified:    .        STATUS
  Log:
  We don't need an API change to support xml parsers.  That's
  only needed of we wanted to provide access to the xml data
  through apreq_param(), which is something an individual xml
  parser can facilitate by stuffing that data in the req->body
  table.
  
  Anyways we're too close to releasing a stable API to still be
  considering such a drastic change.  If the current API is
  insufficient this idea is something folks can tackle in apreq3.
  
  Revision  Changes    Path
  1.61      +1 -11     httpd-apreq-2/STATUS
  
  Index: STATUS
  ===================================================================
  RCS file: /home/cvs/httpd-apreq-2/STATUS,v
  retrieving revision 1.60
  retrieving revision 1.61
  diff -u -r1.60 -r1.61
  --- STATUS	2 Jul 2004 16:18:37 -0000	1.60
  +++ STATUS	5 Jul 2004 17:48:06 -0000	1.61
  @@ -40,16 +40,6 @@
                0:
               -1:
   
  -    - Should we replace req->body with an iterator API (added to
  -      apreq_parser_t)?  The rationale is that this would make xml
  -      parsing possible (xml data doesn't map naturally to apr_table_t).
  -      Xml support is a requirement for XForms.  The disadvantage is that
  -      there may be a performance hit due to the additional abstractions.
  -
  -            +1: joes
  -             0:
  -            -1:
  -
       - We are moving from cvs to subversion as soon as it is convenient.
         Vote was taken in March 2004 (http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=107919363000001&r=1&w=2)
         and the results were as follows:
  
  
  

Mime
View raw message