Mailing-List: contact apreq-dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <3D1BB7A9.9050106@stason.org>
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 09:11:05 +0800
From: Stas Bekman <stas@stason.org>
Organization: Hope, Humanized
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/00200205
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Joshua Moore-Oliva <chatgris@mediapow.com>
Cc: apreq-dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: apreq-2 patches
References: <m3k7ospq3n.fsf@mumonkan.sunstarsys.com> <3D1A87FD.50
 <3D1AD01C.2060501@stason.org> <200206271453.47130.chatgris@mediapow.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Joshua Moore-Oliva wrote:
> Argument for including apreq into the httpd core...
> 
> A lot of posts have been made on the modules board about how to do things like 
> retrieve POST data...  I believe that if apreq is included into the apreq 
> core, it will facilitate more development in C... 
> 
> The way I see it, Perl, tcl etc etc are all trying to make life easier to 
> apache module developers...  why not make life easier for the C developers 
> too?  I think that the adoption of perl modules over C was greatly influenced 
> by the lack of knowledge of the libapreq api...  
> 
> One more argument to add to this...  (since you wanted as many as we could 
> think of :) If we get more people developing in C, wouldn't it be logical to 
> think that there would then be more people accessing the C API, and therefore 
> probably producing more people to help make bugfixes or improvements to 
> apache itself which is written in C?
> 
> Just my two cents.

Good point Josh! Keep those coming!


__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman            JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/     mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:stas@stason.org http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org   http://ticketmaster.com