On Thursday 09 August 2007 11:28, Daniël Mantione wrote:
> With an Apache module, you could:
> * Get AOLserver without dusturbing other users. You could even ask your
>   hoster to install the module.
> * There is no trouble like all connections coming from the same IP. You
>   have access to the real http connection (through Apache though).
> So, I think, this would be a big advantage over a proxy solution, even
> though the proxy solution can work well in a lot of situations.
> Besides this, AOLserver needs to get better in replacing Apache as the
> primary web server on a system, and this means getting multi-user
> capabilities itself. Depending on the way it is done, it can be low
> hanging fruit too.

There is no question that it would be easier in the low end market to have a 
module for Apache. It would save you a few buck on hosting. How much 
community effort should go into saving a few bucks? I am not saying that if 
such a thing appeared all by itself more people wouldn't use it. Could it not 
be just as easy to convince your hoster to proxy to a user space AOLserver?

After all, once you have AOLserver installed, you might want to use a 
database, or install other modules or change the configuration. Do you now 
need to bug your hoster every time you want to change a configuration? 

This model seems to require that a new user convince themselves to use 
AOLserver, then convince their hoster to handle the installation. And the 
hoster isn't getting paid very much, if anything, for the trouble. 

Somehow I think that years of effort could go into transforming AOLserver into 
an Apache clone, but it still isn't Apache. Nobody is dissatisfied with 
Apache for the problem space AOLserver would need to move into.  

AOLserver has multi-user capabilities on a system. Each user can run as many 
AOLservers as they want. What they can't do is all use the same ip:port. Just 
get another ip and problem solved. Also, for static content, AOLserver can 
easliy work as a mass hosting solution. The main issue is you can't give a 
bunch of independent users a chance to execute Tcl commands, maybe you could 
delete some of the Tcl API and make it safe, that would be another 
possibility. Someone suggested multi-user really means multi-process. So this 
might be a question of operating system support. Is it possible? 

tom jackson

AOLserver - http://www.aolserver.com/

To Remove yourself from this list, simply send an email to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
with the
body of "SIGNOFF AOLSERVER" in the email message. You can leave the Subject: 
field of your email blank.

Reply via email to