httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Stein <>
Subject Re: axe proxy support from 2.0?
Date Sat, 13 Nov 1999 19:45:40 GMT
On Sat, 13 Nov 1999, Eli Marmor wrote:
> David Reid wrote:
> > I think the point that Gregs been making (and he'll correct me if I'm wrong
> > I'm sure) is that what most people want is the functionality of various bits
> > of a proxy.  Given this it seems that if we concentrate on writing those
> > bits to be tightly integrated with Apache-2.0 and abandon the idea that we
> > supply a "full-blown" proxy we're getting more bang for our buck.

Bing! Well-said.

The second issue, which actually underlies some of the "bang for our buck"
is that the proxy stuff has not been ported to the 2.0 framework yet.
Nobody seems ready to step up and do that, so I recommended to just kill
the thing. Feedback is against that, though :-), so it looks like we have
a trimming rather than an axe-ing (how the heck do you spell that? :-)

> My message was not a response to Greg's message (BTW: I think that he's
> doing some amazing projects, like the mod_dav and other useful things);

Thanx! :-)

> It was a response to the whole thread/idea, and his message was only the
> last one I saw when I decided to write my message. In any case, I under-
> stood the point that you are trying to clarify, when I wrote the
> previous message, and still thought that many people would miss that
> stuff. Again, I have good reasons for my opinion, but no time and/or
> desire to argue about them. I think that the fact that many people rely
> on things which are not among the "various bits" you mentioned, is
> enough to leave the whole proxy module as is, and logical reasons are
> not needed.

Your opinion is always valuable, developer or not. We do like to
concentrate on things that specifically interest us, but (speaking for
myself at least) we also like to know what people want from Apache.

While I can understand that you (and I'm sure there are others) would like
to see the proxy completely retained, it may not be possible unless
somebody wants to champion it and bring it up to 2.0 speed. Even my
compromise proposal doesn't have a volunteer at the moment...

Gotta dig back thru my mail... I forget who has been maintaining the proxy
module. Maybe they're up for moving all/some of it to 2.0.


Greg Stein,

View raw message