httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From efr...@ncsa.uiuc.edu (Beth Frank)
Subject Re: Issues for a beta release...
Date Wed, 12 Apr 1995 12:39:27 GMT
This is a semi-official response to your issues relating
to the NCSA httpd (semi because I periodically get overruled
by Joseph).

<I've cut only the relevant comments from rst's msg)
 > From: rst@ai.mit.edu (Robert S. Thau)
 > Date: Tue, 11 Apr 95 18:15:25 EDT
 > To: new-httpd@hyperreal.com
 > Subject: Issues for a beta release...
 > 
 > NCSA 1.4 (which may also be released
 > in pretty much the same time frame).

We had hoped to release 1.4 this week in time for the Web conference
in Germany.  Unfortunately things didn't work out that way.  Right
now we're looking at next week.

 > 2) Compatibility.  Current versions (i.e., the *most* recent betas) of
 >    1.4 have the following features which we *don't* support, or do
 >    differently.  Our current draft public docs page says we expect to
 >    be plug-compatible with 1.4, so we have to deal with the following
 >    somehow: 
 >   
 >    b) RefererLog, UserAgentLog --- I don't think these are a terribly
 >       good idea, but if we really want to be plug compatible with 1.4,
 >       we're stuck with them.

The RefererLog and UserAgentLog have been heavily requested by 
groups trying to find ways to organize the information on the
Web.  There are several research groups working on building
maps of to and from links and studying the way people use the web.
They need refer and user agent information.  I urge you to support
some form of this.

In 1.5 we're going to revisit the configuration and format of these
log files.  I plan on setting up a HyperNews page for discussion of
this and other 1.5 feature requests/changes as soon and 1.4 is 
officially released.  I'll post an announcement about the page to
this mailing list when it is available.

If you have better ideas on a format for this information we'd like
to hear them.

 >    c) There's (experimental?) support for group annotation of some
 >       sort --- so far, it seems to consist only of having an
 >       annotation server named in the config files, and jamming its URL
 >       into the MIME headers on returned documents.  We may not even
 >       want to support this until it's documented and stabilized, but
 >       it's there.

Yes, it's experimental.  I'm not even sure this is going to be an
advertised feature.  It was required for a demo at the Web Conference
in Germany this week, so we added it to the beta.  It may be in your
interest to wait and add this as a patch later once all the details
are finalized here.

 > 3) I really would like the APB code in our first public release.

NCSA will not be supporting this in Release 1.4.  We aren't sure
whether or not we'll be supporting this in 1.5.

		Elizabeth Frank
		efrank@ncsa.uiuc.edu

Mime
View raw message