Thank you for your input (and immediate response), Sander and Cliff. We
hope to use it to help resolve our issues.
-Norman Tuttle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Sander Striker wrote:
On Thu, 2003-11-13 at 16:26, Cliff Woolley wrote:
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Norman Tuttle wrote:
How
For those interested in the question of Apache 2.0 uptake, my favorite resource
is http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/index.html - where you get
gobs of details. The upgrade/downgrade report helps identify if a release was
a winner (mostly upgrading to, or through, that version) - or a
--On Thursday, November 13, 2003 11:01 AM -0800 Stas Bekman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Should we add an explicit explanation to AP_MODE_READBYTES: return at most
readbytes data. Can't return 0 with APR_BLOCK_READ. Can't return more than
readbytes data.
I'd say the first and last one are equivalent
--On Thursday, November 13, 2003 1:51 PM -0500 Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I'm confused then... I had thought that there were API differences
(within httpd and apr) between the 2 trees in able to support
some of the new features.
I suspect that the biggest pain for a 2.0-2.2 migration
Although it's probably a little late to be responding to innuendo, the bare minimum
points that need a response;
At 12:36 AM 11/14/2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There was a lot going down 'offline' and things were just
being 'announced' on the forum.
That's the way development often happens.
At 12:36 AM 11/14/2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
'Individual' attempts to contribute are getting IGNORED
and the last few words of this message thread's subject
line are just asking to hear from the powers that be
what they intend to do about that ( solutions please ? ).
Yes, I think that's the
Bill,
Thanks for the great link. Here's one for you:
http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/server_graph.html?type=httpdomaindir=
month=200310servbase=YToxOntpOjA7czoxMzoiQXBhY2hlLzEuMy4yNyI7fQ==serv1=QX
BhY2hlLzIuMC40Nw==
It's the historical market share of all servers overlaid with 2.0.47
Around line 590, apxs.in checks for a prior LoadModule
directive using:
foreach $lmd (@lmd) {
my $what = $opt_A ? preparing : activating;
if ($content !~ m|\n#?\s*$lmd|) {
The problem here is that the $lmd portion looks something
like LoadModule
Joe Schaefer wrote:
Another approach would be to do nothing.
don't tell me people have been reading the wheel of httpd-ev... thread :)
I'd be happy to
prepare a patch if this approach - to do nothing - is
unacceptable. Of course, suggestions to make the patch
as robust as possible would be
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The 'other' not-so-dedicated-but-certainly-interested
developers felt 'shut out' of the 2.0 development cycle
because it was obvious a lot of it was taking place
'off line' and nothing was being documented so they
couldn't really get a good handle on what was going
on in
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
Thanks for the explanations Justin. Once I'll get some free time I'll need to
revamp the filters chapter [1] to address the read mode issue. So far I was
completely ignoring it :(
(1) http://perl.apache.org/docs/2.0/user/handlers/filters.html
Though it'd be nice to
On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 05:51:46PM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
Creating roles like this is just as bad as having chunks of httpd owned
by one particular developer. (See below)
I don't think you understand the role of 'patch manager.' On the projects
I'm involved with, that person's
12 matches
Mail list logo
