httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Stein <gst...@lyra.org>
Subject Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0/modules/proxy proxy_http.c
Date Mon, 05 Feb 2001 20:46:40 GMT
Woah... having trouble with a module is very different than missing a
maintainer. And mod_rewrite is arguably much more important to people than
mod_proxy.

I would suggest working on simplifying and reducing the code, rather than
punting it. It may be possible to make it more maintainable, than to just
toss it because of a few bugs.

Cheers,
-g

On Mon, Feb 05, 2001 at 11:17:57AM -0800, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> From: "Jim Jagielski" <jim@jaguNET.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 11:08 AM
> 
> 
> > William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> > > 
> > > This is a substantial entity into and of itself.  There are a number of ASF
> > > projects that are fully integrated into httpd-2.0, but don't reside in the
> > > primary tree.  Take modperl-2.0 for example.
> > > 
> > 
> > The same could be said for mod_rewrite, especially with the
> > current "troubles" we've had. I'd +1 that as well.
> 
> ++1 ... for apache-2.0 (say, modrewrite-2.0) - but this has a seperate issue.
> 
> mod_perl and mod_proxy already have development lists.  mod_rewrite?  I'd suggest
> that we have another step before we do this, unless new-httpd continues to -own-
> the module and support of it.

-- 
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/

Mime
View raw message