httpd-apreq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Issac Goldstand <>
Subject Re: Was there any concrete decision on apreq?
Date Tue, 24 Feb 2015 11:02:03 GMT
I think nothing.

Most mod_perl users (I think) install apreq via Apache2::Request.  That
can continue to be maintained on CPAN, as is, linking against httpd
instead of mod_apreq

Or do you forsee a problem here?

On 2/24/2015 9:56 AM, Steve Hay wrote:
> What would this mean for mod_perl users? I, and I assume many
> others(?), still use the perl glue part of libapreq in mod_perl
> software.
> I only just spotted this thread, and just wondered how such mod_perl
> users will be affected, if at all.
> On 24 February 2015 at 03:24, Joseph Schaefer <> wrote:
>> I still want to do that just lacking tuits
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> On Feb 23, 2015, at 3:56 PM, Eric Covener <> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 3:45 PM, Gregg Smith <> wrote:
>>>> Am I missing something? Did I miss a boatload of email where any firm
>>>> decision was made?
>>> I don't think you have missed anything. I assume very few people have
>>> any clue how it's integrated/used today.  The last thing I have in my
>>> mail archive is joes proposal to pull the library part back out and
>>> make it available in a way similar to mod_ldap.

View raw message