> From: Geoffrey Young [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 7:54 PM
> > probably Apache core shouldn't change the (vague) semantics of > > r->filename but it can provide the access functions mentioned above > > > > modules for 2.0 that look at r->filename could call > > ap_request_filename() or ap_request_filename_str() depending on the > > requirement (dumb logging code would just call _str() version) > > so I take it that the resulting silence means that nobody here is interested > in an API wrapper? > > if it's just a matter of tuits, I'm volunteering to put it together if a > loose consensus is reached as to the design. Tuits I would say. Sander
