httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
Subject Re: cvs commit: apache-2.0/src/main http_core.c http_protocol.cutil_filter.c
Date Thu, 14 Sep 2000 17:58:40 GMT
On Thu, 14 Sep 2000, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:

> wrote:
> > 
> > There are a couple of problems with the syntax that Ken proposed that I
> > discovered when trying to implement it.
> It would be nice if you would discuss the issues before implementing.
> > 1)  The first argument being an extension or file name is wrong
> >     IMHO.  We already have a means for attaching things to files
> >     or extensions.  Those are file or directory sections.
> Um-hmm.  And how about all the other directives that take
> extensions as arguments?  Are you going to suggest that we
> rewrite all of them?

Nope, do you plan on suggesting that we re-write all the ones that don't?

> > 2)  The first argument being a mime-type just confuses things.  Are
> >     we using the mime-type of the original file or the thing we are
> >     sending to the network?
> Whatever the type is when the generator/handler has completed the
> metadata and before beginning filter processing.
> >     If we are using the original file, then that assumes that we
> >     can add filters at any time based on mime-type
> I don't see that.  The filter sequence is derived as soon as the
> original metadata is finalised.  Changing the metadata does not
> imply changing the filter stack.
> >     See, the mime type can change half-way through a request.
> But that shouldn't change the filter chain.

Doesn't that completely violate the principle of least astonishment?  I
have a filter that I associated with a mime-type.  I have a CGI that has
that mime-type, but it doesn't get run through the filter?  I know I would
be thoroughly confused by that.

> > For right now, I needed a way to add filters cleanly from my
> > config file and this does it.
> For right now you could hard-code the filter sequence or work with
> mods in your own directory rather than tainting the repository
> with your personal opinion of how a topic under discussion should
> be implemented.  Please don't do this any more.. :-(

Ken, if you have solutions, please feel free to modify the directive.  I
came right out and said it wasn't going to be a complete solution.  It
works, and it gets us moving forward.  Why do I need to have a full
solution before I commit?  I added a part of the solution, if you have
more, you should complete the solution.  I scratched my itch, feel free to
scrath yours.

Ryan Bloom               
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131

View raw message