httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <...@jaguNET.com>
Subject Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0/modules/ssl mod_ssl.c mod_ssl.h ssl_engine_config.c ssl_engine_mutex.c
Date Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:32:15 GMT
At 1:00 PM +0100 3/19/03, André Malo wrote:
>* William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
>> At 06:19 PM 3/18/2003, André Malo wrote:
>>>* jim@apache.org wrote:
>>>
>>>>        if (strcEQ(arg, "none") || strcEQ(arg, "no")) {
>>>>            mc->nMutexMode  = SSL_MUTEXMODE_NONE;
>>>>        }
>>>>   +    /* NOTE: previously, 'yes' implied 'sem' */
>>>>   +    else if (strcEQ(arg, "default") || strcEQ(arg, "yes")) {
>>>>   +        mc->nMutexMode  = SSL_MUTEXMODE_USED;
>>>>   +        mc->nMutexMech = APR_LOCK_DEFAULT;
>>>
>>>ehm, sorry for that late response to that ;-)
>>>But shouldn't we follow our own conventions and (at least also) recognize
>>>On|Off here (instead of yes/no)?
>>
>> I was about to say that 'on' implies that 'yes' is a correct setting going
>> forward, and that we only hoped to ensure continued success of existing
>> configs.  But now that I think about it, we are saying 'default locking if
>> simply turned on' - so I suppose 'on' would also be alright in that context.
>>
>> On the other hand, no, none and off all seem like reasonable flags to disable
>> the mutex altogether.  Adding off wouldn't be a bad thing.
>
>Ok, if there come no objections, I'm going to put it in :)
>

+1 here... Don't forget the docs, and for 2.0 and 2.1
-- 
===========================================================================
   Jim Jagielski   [|]   jim@jaguNET.com   [|]   http://www.jaguNET.com/
      "A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order
             will lose both and deserve neither" - T.Jefferson

Mime
View raw message