> I had a patch which added a '?xml' option > to mod_status. > It's a large (>400 lines) patch, but most of it is puts. > does anyone have any objections to it?
At the last ApacheCon I mentioned to a few people that I had written some patches to 1.3 mod_status for XML output but not cleaned them up. After playing with them internally for a while we thought that it made more sense to have a mod_status_xml module: - mod_status is already getting quite convulted having to check for table support and minimal (?auto). - I needed to add a directive, and allow optional commands to tailor the XML output (less output for example) - I wanted some of the output in a different format (dates for example) so the amount of shared code was minimal - Because recent browsers can render the XML into HTML internally (and it involves less bytes transferred) I could see mod_status_xml being used without mod_status I wrote an example sometime in July/Aug but didn't get around to porting it to 2.0. Here is what we have so far http://www.awe.com/mark/dev/mod_status_xml/ Ian's patch is also good; although we've chosen different ways of representing the data (different combinations of attributes too). What we ought to do is to first decide what the XML output is going to look like (it'll be a pain to change this later), then it doesn't really matter if it's a patch to mod_status or a new module. Heres what the module produces (you might have to view source if you get a rendered version) http://www.awe.com/mark/dev/mod_status_xml/example.xml Mark -- Mark J Cox ........................................... www.awe.com/mark Apache Software Foundation ..... OpenSSL Group ..... Apache Week editor
