httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject Re: mod_fcgid and broken doc links
Date Thu, 14 Jan 2016 22:19:30 GMT
On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 6:19 AM, Jim Jagielski <jim@jagunet.com> wrote:

>
> > On Jan 13, 2016, at 12:28 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wrowe@rowe-clan.net>
> wrote:
> >
> > I can see us moving those modules into trunk (not 2.4), retaining the
> > mmn tests for 2.2 and 2.4 compat, and then deriving an fcgid release
> > out of trunk/modules/fcgid/.  But I'm not clear why we would want to
> > maintain the duplication between mod_proxy_fcgi and mod_fcgid?
> > Individually they get little enough attention as it is.
>
> Because they are separate solutions to a similar problem,
> ala mod_sed and mod_substitute for example. I can site several
> more if that is worthwhile (but the point is made) mod_fcgid does
> not require the whole mod_proxy overhead, for example, but
> lacks some features that mod_proxy_fcgi does have, since the
> latter can leverage some of that "overhead".


Good point with your example, this is something that should
be benchmarked and the winner-take-all, loser bumped from the
trunk/ copy of httpd.  They are slightly different in that sed is one
specific grammar, while substitute uses literal replacements, but
that could be a syntax tweak to mod_sed to allow some literal
replacements.  In any case, it relieves the dozen or so regular
httpd contributors from maintaining two modules which do, for
the most part, the very same thing expressed with redundant
yet different code.

Likewise with fcgid/proxy_fcgi - /if/ we bring mod_fcgid sources
into the trunk, I'd add the caveat that we do so if there is an offer
to eliminate all of the code duplication in the process, or reject
this proposition.  They do perform two different purposes and
overlap in interesting ways, so there has to be something gained
by pushing fcgid upon the entire httpd committer community
to maintain.  It was one thing for the handful of us who commit
to mod_fcgid to deal with that legacy, but another to push it
mainstream.


> > Just my 2c USD, I'm open to ideas.
>
> That is good to know.


Was simply offering backstory for why things ended up as they
have, sans snark, and no snark needed in response :)  Would
love to learn who is interested in helping merge mod_fcgid and
mod_proxy_ftp functionality into a util_fcgi, or otherwise condense
this functionality into something manageable, long term.

Mime
View raw message