Mailing-List: contact dev-help@perl.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: domain of gcamd-dev@m.gmane.org
 designates 80.91.229.2 as permitted sender)
Mail-Followup-To: dev@perl.apache.org
To: dev@perl.apache.org
From: Joe Schaefer <joe+gmane@sunstarsys.com>
Subject: Re: [mp2] taking a step back?
Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2005 16:39:01 -0500
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <87zmzs25je.fsf@gemini.sunstarsys.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.56.0412312141280.31589@theoryx5.uwinnipeg.ca>
 <41D6CED1.2000504@stason.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mail-Copies-To: never
User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:xtrY7PmKibmbwSy2/Ben9/53Mhw=
Sender: news <news@sea.gmane.org>

Stas Bekman <stas@stason.org> writes:

> Randy Kobes wrote:
> [...]
>> Although this may not be the best time to raise this, the
>> strong opinions being expressed, plus the shortness of time
>> on the part of the many of us, perhaps we could look at what
>> would be involved to move the modules in the mp2 core so as
>> not to conflict with mp1. If I counted right, there's not
>> that many:
>> Apache::Log
>> Apache::PerlSections
>> Apache::Resource
>> Apache::SizeLimit
>> Apache::Status
>> Apache::URI
>> Apache::Util
>> Putting aside for the moment the relationship of these to
>> their mp1 counterparts, it shouldn't be too hard to come up
>> with alternate, descriptive names, either in an Apache2::*
>
> -1 to embedding numbers in API

Agreed in principle; however my reasons are centered 
around not overburdening the porting efforts of others.
But when people start asking us to do this, and they've
given carefully explained reasons why we should consider 
it, I'm not nearly as steadfast about it anymore.  I really
like Randy's suggestion to take a moment, and discuss some of
the things Doug first set out to achieve with mp2, and how 
well we've been able to follow though with his original plan.
And just as importantly, where this will lead to in the future.
Because I honestly don't see the innate value in having
an architecture-independent Apache:: namespace, when the
mod_perl developers really have no way of controlling what 
the httpd developers decide to do with their core data 
structures.

Also, it isn't necessarily the case that we also version
APR::, ModPerl::, and friends just because we tag a 2
onto Apache and mod_perl.  So let's not lump them all together
just because they're distributed in the same tarball.

As always we try to do what's in the best interests of
our community, and I think having an open discussion 
about the Apache:: namespace, from a broad perspective,
is the right thing for us to do.

-- 
Joe Schaefer


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org