Doesn't some de minimis treatment through the incubator still apply? There are two templates, one for a full project's incubation, one for a lightweight pass through IP vetting. ++1 here for submission to the incubator as a new httpd instrumentation subproject. Also happy to help on the ppmc.
My own interest is snmp support - I believe my employer's port of mod_snmp effectively was able to get at most of the operating parameters without extra patches to httpd 2.0 (thank you to new hook flexibility!) But having more than one instrumentation module will really show up any weaknesses in what we expose to monitoring, and help us correct them before 2.2 walks out the door. -1 on experimental - it needs to die :) Look how long it's taken to get cache stable. If that module was only placed in the main distro once it was fully complete, it would have been finished far sooner. In general, new modules into 2.0 doesn't seem to make alot of sense since 2.2 will release before ApacheCon (straightforward goal, don't you think?.) One thought on 2.2 was to simply not place any unfinished modules on that branch, and let them live on in the 2.1-dev (well, that becomes 2.3-dev once 2.2.0 is golden), until it can be released. The modules can live in the "right location" in a 2.odd-dev tree from their inception. Bill At 11:29 AM 8/11/2004, Bill Stoddard wrote: >I've written a module to ARM4 instrument Apache 2. I'd like to donate this module to >the ASF and ideally put it in the modules/experimental directory (or somewhere else >in the ASF where we can place it under cvs control?). The ARM4 API headers are >available from the Open Group website at >http://www.opengroup.org/tech/management/arm/ (I have not checked the license lately. >My assumption is that the license is not too restrictive, though I could be wrong). >I've heard rumors that HP may be making an ARM4 SDK publically available "real soon >now". > >I would sign on to support the module if we put it in httpd-2.0 modules/experimental. >Anyone interested? > >Bill
