httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <...@jaguNET.com>
Subject Re: FYI brotli
Date Thu, 16 Feb 2017 19:51:19 GMT
Whatever... nginx will have it 1st anyway. And once
again we fail our users by having a nickel holding up
a dollar.

> On Feb 16, 2017, at 2:48 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 12:47 PM, Jim Jagielski <jim@jagunet.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Feb 16, 2017, at 1:15 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I concur with Evgeny Kotkov that an ABI stable dependency is appropriate
>>> before adding this to httpd 2.4.x - so far as I've read none have suggested
>>> this as an experimental addition to 2.4.
>> 
>> I do. We release it w/ the caveat that it is dependent on a
>> library that may change. Until that happens, we have users able
>> to use Brotli. That is a Good Thing IMO.
> 
> Let's examine your claim. There is no documentation at all of where to
> find brotli. http://brotli.org/ is now one day old (congrats!!!) - but not yet
> exactly discoverable, http://lmgtfy.com/?q=brotli+package
> 
> The package lives now in Debian stretch and sid. Archlinux packages
> seem out-of-sync. This only exists on Fedora as copr package so far.
> So without telling users where to find it, "users able to use Brotli" is a
> false statement.
> 
> OS distributors are waiting for 1.0.0 to package this. What's our rush?
> 
>> Re: the docs, seem a minor nit to hold back, esp when you
>> don't even quantify how the docs are a complete mess nor the
>> requirement for an example in docs/conf. What other requirements
>> will you be spinning up?
> 
> Missing 1. where to find brotli? 2. working config examples? These
> points might seem counter-intuitive, but without such simple things,
> the code is just dead weight.
> 
> I'm investigating the interaction between brotli and deflate so we can
> support both simultaniously before feeding it to our stable users. Halting
> compression for half of the browsers in order to win a small percentage
> gain for the other half of the browsers seems sub-optimal, no?
> 
> I'll be glad to discover that the brotli and deflate filters already coexist
> peacefully without double-compressing.


Mime
View raw message