Mailing-List: contact new-httpd-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org
Message-ID: <3A5AD9B6.A88921D@algroup.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 09:28:22 +0000
From: Ben Laurie <ben@algroup.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: new-httpd@apache.org
Subject: Re: windows build & handler hook
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10101081824120.407-100000@mojo.covalent.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Doug MacEachern wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 8 Jan 2001 rbb@covalent.net wrote:
> > >
> > > Vomit!
> >
> > Thank you Ben.  I have been trying to phrase that exact feeling, but I
> > couldn't express it quite that well.
> 
> heh, it's funny you guys feel that way about this, i almost hurled when i
> saw that response handlers are now in the business of type/handler
> checking.  it doesn't make me feel all that more ill adding a little hack
> to get back behavior that's been around for 5 years.

Actually, I don't think I object too much to setting r->handler. What I
do mind is setting it to */*! At least set it to a real type/handler
name. For example "default-handler" would be a sensible choice,
possibly, even better would be the content type if available.

After all, if you are going to punt, you should surely make sure you
punt to the right guy, right?

BTW, I hope this behaviour is documented - when I set a handler, I
rather expect it to stay set and not go around serving up stuff using
other handlers at its whim.

Cheers,

Ben.

--
http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html

"There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he
doesn't mind who gets the credit." - Robert Woodruff