httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Brian J. France" <br...@brianfrance.com>
Subject Re: DAV Provider Patch
Date Tue, 06 Oct 2009 21:15:29 GMT
Sorry for the delay in response to this, life got in the way.

I have updated the patch here:

http://www.brianfrance.com/software/apache/dav/dav-provider-3.diff

This patch doesn't break binary compatibility (adds the functions to  
the end of the struct) and adds both get_request_rec and  
get_pathname.  While in most cases you can pull pathname from the  
request_rec, how would you get the pathname from a mod_dav_fs_db type  
module?  Should mod_dav_fs_db update r->filename or should we keep the  
get_pathname function in the provider struct?

Either way works for me, just happen to have a discussion at work  
about writing a custom mod_dav_fs module and thought of this patch case.

Thoughts?

Brian

On Sep 21, 2009, at 11:34 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Dan Poirier
>> Sent: Montag, 21. September 2009 17:28
>> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: DAV Provider Patch
>>
>> "Brian J. France" <brian@brianfrance.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Sep 21, 2009, at 10:15 AM, Graham Leggett wrote:
>>>
>>>> Brian J. France wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I believe this is the first patch that will break binary
>>>>> compatibility
>>>>> because it adds a function pointer to the middle of the struct.  I
>>>>> believe binary compatibility could be retained if we add
>> the function
>>>>> pointers to the end of the struct instead of in the
>> middle.  Moving
>>>>> the
>>>>> function could be part of the back porting patch to 2.2, but leave
>>>>> it as
>>>>> is in 2.3+.
>>>>
>>>> Would it be possible to move the function pointers to the
>> end of the
>>>> struct for httpd-trunk as well? Breaking binary
>> compatibility is to be
>>>> avoided if it can be, even on trunk.
>>>
>>>
>>> Sure.  Which method would be preferred?  Having two hooks
>> or just one
>>> and use the request_rec to get the filename?
>>
>> As long as the filename can be gotten trivially from the request rec,
>> I'd say keep things simple and just add the one hook.
>
> +1.
>
> Regards
>
> Rüdiger
>


Mime
View raw message