Mailing-List: contact new-httpd-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org
Message-ID: <003101bfb755$179001c0$f3e2a218@apache>
From: "Bill Stoddard" <reddrum@attglobal.net>
To: <new-httpd@apache.org>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0005051622170.14483-100000@koj.rkbloom.net>
Subject: Re: Cleanup the STATUS file.
Date: Sat, 6 May 2000 08:17:48 -0400
Organization: Apache Software Foundation
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I added the dynamically loadable MPMs. It would be nice to have, but, as
Dean says, it's just not a good idea for the reason mentioned.

Bill

----- Original Message -----
From: <rbb@covalent.net>
To: <new-httpd@apache.org>
Sent: Friday, May 05, 2000 4:25 PM
Subject: Cleanup the STATUS file.


>
> In case people can't tell, I've been spending the last week trying to get
> items out of the status file.  :-)
>
> There are at least two items in the STATUS file that I thought we had
> decided were bad ideas:
>
>     * The handler hook needs to use the new registration system
>
>     * Dynamically loadable MPMs
>       Enable users of the binary distributions of Apache to be able to
>       dynamically load the MPM.
>
>       Dean says this probably isn't a good idea.  For example consider
>       -lpthread, you couldn't have the same core run with pthreads,
>       prefork, and gnu pth without a lot of headaches is my guess.
>
>
> The first is under show-stoppers.  Can we decide if these are valid ideas,
> and if not get them out of the STATUS file.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Ryan
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
___
> Ryan Bloom                        rbb@apache.org
> 406 29th St.
> San Francisco, CA 94131
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
>
>