httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mathihalli, Madhusudan" <mad...@hp.com>
Subject RE: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 STATUS
Date Mon, 14 Jun 2004 01:41:23 GMT

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Joe Orton [mailto:jorton@redhat.com] 
>Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2004 2:02 PM
>To: dev@httpd.apache.org
>Subject: Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 STATUS
>
>For precedent there have already been two binary 
>backwards-incompatible changes made on the 2.0 branch of such 
>"exposed but really private"
>interfaces:
>
>http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/httpd-2.0/modules/ssl/mod_ssl
>.h?r1=1.122.2.5&r2=1.122.2.6&only_with_tag=APACHE_2_0_BRANCH
>http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/httpd-2.0/modules/dav/main/mo
>d_dav.h?r1=1.65.2.1&r2=1.65.2.2
>
>I don't really care about this patch in particular, but moving 
>forward I think it would be good to backport the 
>mod_ssl.h->ssl_private.h split to 2.0 both to prevent further 
>confusion and facilitate other useful backports like the hooks 
>into mod_ssl from mod_rewrite and mod_headers.
>

I totally agree with Joe here - there are a whole bunch of useful
features that can be back ported if we can do the mod_ssl.h ->
ssl_private.h split. For the record, we've got a number of requests to
back port the mod_rewrite and mod_headers features to 2.0 on hp-ux. Yes
- we can back port the changes without going for the split - but the
split would just make the things a lot easier in the future.

+1 for the back port

-Madhu

Mime
View raw message