trafficserver-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Do we really want the "examples" installed in .../lib ?
Date Tue, 25 May 2010 14:02:29 GMT
On 05/25/2010 04:02 AM, Mladen Turk wrote:
> On 05/25/2010 06:43 AM, Leif Hedstrom wrote:
>> E.g.
>>
>> lib/trafficserver/remap.so
>> lib/trafficserver/blacklist-0.so
>> lib/trafficserver/replace-header.so
>>
>>
>> etc. Most of these are not intended for production use, and are fairly
>> unusable "as is". I can see us building them as part of the build
>> process, but I really don't think we should include them in the "make
>> install" target.
>>
>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>
> +1.
> We should have separate make examples target
> (with eventual install-examples)

Yeah, that would be my preference too.

>
> Also are those just examples or "plugins".
> If they are plugins they should be rather installed in libexec thought


They are plugins, and *if* we should install them, they should go in 
libexec. My reason for not wanting them installed (by default at least) 
is for two reasons:

1) It might encourage OS distros to include them in package 
distributions, thinking they are production plugins.

2) Users might think they are production plugins.


We do have a set of useful production plugins coming out of Y! into the 
OpenSource soon, but they will not go into the "examples" area. The 
examples are there to illustrate the Ink APIs, as documented in the 
developer documentation.

That much said, there might be one or two plugins in the examples 
directory that ought to get moved over to the "official" plugin 
directory. I know Steve wrote a little Remap Plugin that I think could 
be useful for users, and it is currently in the examples directory.

Cheers,

-- leif


Mime
View raw message