> On Sat, Mar 02, 2002 at 11:25:33AM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote: > > My opinion is that a request is the time from when a user sends the GET > > line to the time that the response is sent back. Justin (please correct > > me if I am wrong) believes that the request is the lifetime of the > > request_rec in the code. The problem is that the request_rec can be > > modified by causing an internal redirect or a sub_request. > > Right. I'm content for just trying to get something to work now > and readdress this when we open 2.1. I think that there can be
I'm sorry, but this is BOGUS! I want to see a 2.0 release, but adding code that is wrong just so that we can get a GA release is NOT the way to go about doing that. The whole point of Open Source is that we don't have to cut corners just to meet release dates. Do it right, it will take less time in the long run. I am really disappointed that the attitude on this list right now is "ship it soon regardless of quality or maintainability." > multiple independent request_rec's created for one connection. > I believe the concept of fast_redirect is bogus and broken. But, > you and OtherBill seem intent on keeping that. It has some serious performance implications to remove that function, although both Bill and I started by saying that the function was completely bogus. Ryan
