httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alexei Kosut <>
Subject Re: Hello.. and why stick with NCSA config format?
Date Thu, 09 Jan 1997 18:39:26 GMT
On Thu, 9 Jan 1997, sameer wrote:

> 	wtf respect to the API stuff... I am all for a few additional
> handlers going in soon, which rings me back to the 1.3 heresy. I am
> *completely* against delaying 2.0 development, but I think a 1.3 with
> a better API should come out within the next 6 months, well before 2.0
> can come out.

Not true, IMHO. Assuming we can get RST to say something... as I
recall, his threaded version of Apache was pretty much done a few
months ago, and current with the 1.2 code to that point. All we would
need to do would be to update it such (he may have already, I don't
know), make it work on all the platforms, add the "extra" stuff that's
been lying around

Remember, we were supposed to have 1.2.0 out by the end of August, and
then we were going to get right to work on 2.0. It's January
already. Don't bother talking about a 1.3, please... I'm vetoing it
right now.

> 	I think the IO handlers are best left for 2.0, actually,
> because threading allows for protocol layering, but there might be a
> use for it sooner.

Threading has nothing to do with protocol layering, unless you are
layering in a threaded protocol (like MUX or HTTP-NG). However, RST's
Apache did have layered protocol functions, using either sfio of BSD's
funopen(), which worked rather well. I've been thinking that another
layer of API abstraction would probably be desired, rather then
letting the modules play directly with the IO streams, but that's not

The point being that once you have stream functions that support
layering well (BUFF doesn't), it's trivial to add it to the API.

Alexei Kosut <>      The Apache HTTP Server

View raw message