httpd-cvs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From gst...@apache.org
Subject cvs commit: httpd-2.0 ROADMAP
Date Tue, 01 Oct 2002 16:51:10 GMT
gstein      2002/10/01 09:51:10

  Modified:    .        ROADMAP
  Log:
  bleeble blooble blam
  
  Revision  Changes    Path
  1.15      +31 -2     httpd-2.0/ROADMAP
  
  Index: ROADMAP
  ===================================================================
  RCS file: /home/cvs/httpd-2.0/ROADMAP,v
  retrieving revision 1.14
  retrieving revision 1.15
  diff -u -r1.14 -r1.15
  --- ROADMAP	1 Oct 2002 15:44:35 -0000	1.14
  +++ ROADMAP	1 Oct 2002 16:51:10 -0000	1.15
  @@ -94,7 +94,25 @@
         sorts of operations.  But this only needs to be the name itself
         and not a full path.
   
  -      Justin: Can we leverage the path info, or do we not trust the user?
  +      Justin: Can we leverage the path info, or do we not trust the
  +              user?
  +
  +      gstein: well, it isn't the "path info", but the actual URI of
  +              the resource. And of course we trust the user... that is
  +              the resource they requested.
  +              
  +              dav_resource->uri is the field you want. path_info might
  +              still exist, but that portion might be related to the
  +              CGI concept of "path translated" or some other further
  +              resolution.
  +              
  +              To continue, I would suggest that "path translated" and
  +              having *any* path info is Badness. It means that you did
  +              not fully resolve a resource for the given URI. The
  +              "abs_path" in a URI identifies a resource, and that
  +              should get fully resolved. None of this "resolve to
  +              <here> and then we have a magical second resolution
  +              (inside the CGI script)" or somesuch.
       
       * The translate_name hook goes away
   
  @@ -187,3 +205,14 @@
         - Have an 'execute_resource' hook/func that allows the
           repository to choose its manner - be it exec() or whatever.
           - Won't this approach lead to duplication of code?  Helper fns?
  +
  +      gstein: PHP, Perl, and Python scripts are nominally executed by
  +              a filter inserted by mod_php/perl/python. I'd suggest
  +              that shell/batch scripts are similar.
  +
  +              But to ask further: what if it is an executable
  +              *program* rather than just a script? Do we yank that out
  +              of the repository, drop it onto the filesystem, and run
  +              it? eeewwwww...
  +              
  +              I'll vote -0.9 for CGIs as a filter. Keep 'em handlers.
  
  
  

Mime
View raw message