httpd-docs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Trawick <traw...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: do we have/need a chart of module dependencies in 2.4, or some convention in each module's doc for showing that?
Date Thu, 17 Nov 2011 20:27:22 GMT
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Rich Bowen <rbowen@rcbowen.com> wrote:
>
> On Nov 17, 2011, at 2:27 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
>
> e.g., proxy-balancer needs slotmem-shm*
>
> in 2.4 this is a lot less obvious than proxy-http needs proxy
>
> *a more complex and correct explanation is certainly possible, but
> down near the surface of the earth it needs to be clear that in
> general you need to also load X in order to use Y
>
> We do not. It would be really helpful to have that as an item in the
> standard module doc head along with Description and Status.

The dictionary entry for Dependency could explain the different types
of dependencies -- explicit module vs provider.

I'm struggling with what exactly to declare for provider-type
dependencies.  List the group, which links to a section of some
provider overview page that shows the bundled implementers of that
group?  Or just explicitly list the bundled modules?

> Are there cases
> where a diagram would be more useful than just listing dependencies?

It might save some time when planning a highly-customized build to
look at a table or chart or ???.  (better for the wiki perhaps)

>
>
> --
> Rich Bowen
> rbowen@rcbowen.com :: @rbowen
> rbowen@apache.org
>
>
>
>
>



-- 
Born in Roswell... married an alien...

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org


Mime
View raw message