Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 32239 invoked from network); 19 Mar 2011 10:58:27 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 19 Mar 2011 10:58:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 56085 invoked by uid 500); 19 Mar 2011 10:58:26 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 56011 invoked by uid 500); 19 Mar 2011 10:58:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 55999 invoked by uid 99); 19 Mar 2011 10:58:26 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 19 Mar 2011 10:58:26 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of poirier@pobox.com designates 208.72.237.35 as permitted sender) Received: from [208.72.237.35] (HELO sasl.smtp.pobox.com) (208.72.237.35) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 19 Mar 2011 10:58:19 +0000 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1CFE122C for ; Sat, 19 Mar 2011 06:57:58 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=Y3REuu4uM9YIgntpJNvFvLzwA+I=; b=ZNCgfm 8QhYxFg9zqzocCaIEeoZ0OfkJhA8SqX9VgcYxHRlPlZHlXSP+ZDzfz+Ydj6ObHUp S06ezvioXralqVyr+ZnYrSOzQrzl6jCJV++lDeNbsCj82xrkng6uEgx13tsPcciC wMYc2ZRYhGFU9eY3W/PZLjCTdpEpFSBoTBcs8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:subject :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=FUBCtXq6OwG47goNex6AVmSDMPKy6MWs KhWs9QiI+jweT/+VLMcWMgO4S69KD7I14HysPC3tumctJbqNCnBay+FQTpX8HXOj mBwMGFAoObHx0j42QdV0EuFbVbYepSOS+Ud5EodfdnTVNJbiSLGVbK+AaEx4h9VY 00Nc4zSyD3c= Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE8C4122B for ; Sat, 19 Mar 2011 06:57:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from kabuki.mynet (unknown [24.136.204.69]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 4E9E9122A for ; Sat, 19 Mar 2011 06:57:57 -0400 (EDT) From: Dan Poirier To: dev@httpd.apache.org Subject: Re: a plan mod_lua and 2.4 In-Reply-To: (Brian Akins's message of "Tue, 15 Mar 2011 09:08:22 -0400") References: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110014 (No Gnus v0.14) Emacs/23.3 (darwin) Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2011 06:57:56 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: BFCF9D0A-5217-11E0-8A98-C1F4E168B6F2-25076293!b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Tue. 2011-03-15 at 09:08 AM EDT, "Akins, Brian" wrote: > How many people actual run mod_lua (or a derivative/relative) in production? > Am I the only one on a "real" site? I guess the others, if any, aren't reading dev@. And searching gmane's archive of the user list only turns up a few mentions in almost 90,000 posts. Of course, it's not in a production release of the server yet. And even when 2.4.0 ships, it'll probably still be marked experimental.