-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Folks,
I have been meaning to follow up on this ever since that BOF, and am
deeply annoyed that it has taken me this long.
As a matter of fact, my memory of that BOF session has now faded to a
considerable extent and I don't feel comfortable even giving a list
of attendees because I would leave people out.
I have pinned to my office wall the flip-over sheet with notes I took
during the session and will now transcribe those. If anyone present
at the event notices I'm leaving something out, please speak up.
Building on my original message below, we discussed what should be
implemented and how.
One aspect of TCAHMAN that I hadn't covered in my original discussion
is how to add modules from the repository to an existing Apache
install. This would require a program, installed with the server,
that can fetch the module code and run the build/install. We have
tentatively named this program apxs++ since it's a logical extension
of what apxs does today. For maximum compatibility, this tool would
have to be written in C. Currently, apxs is a Perl program but you
can't always count on the availability of Perl on the system,
especially on Windows. The apxs++ tool would be available only when
mod_so is available.
If you're linking modules statically, you're compiling your own httpd
and should be able to fetch the source code for the desired module(s)
before you start compiling. I have no notes about the scenarios
described below, fetching the module code from configure or pointing
configure at a module source tarball, but I seem to recall the group
was not overly enthusiastic about configure downloading and injecting
source code into the build.
All this goodness, if and when it happens, would be run from a newly
created httpd-modules subproject. We discussed the proposed nature
and structure of this subproject (which itself has not been proposed
yet) and the general idea seemed to be that we creat a flat sandbox
where module developers can commit to everything. Every httpd
committer automatically gets httpd-modules, and the subproject could
be a breeding ground for new httpd committers. If and when a module
develops its own community, it can get its own subproject (example:
mod_python) or even go top level (example: mod_perl, mod_tcl). The
httpd-modules subproject would also own the repository code.
The TCAHMAN system would be targeted at:
a) builders (who build their own Apache)
b) enhancers (what did I mean by this? Perhaps folks who want
to hang additional modules into an existing Apache?)
c) packagers (TCAHMAN could register installed modules with the
various package registries out there, giving
httpd packagers a powerful way to manage the
installed core and modules)
d) Testers (perl-framework) (Not sure what I meant by this)
We would initially populate the repository with modules that were
formerly in the core, and eventually open it up to third-party module
developers. Having easy access to modules through TCAHMAN will allow
us (httpd) to lighten the distribution
Once we open the repository up to third-party developers, we may have
to do a 'click through' (or key through) acknowledgement that we
(ASF) are not responsible for code that is not ours. IANAL, so I
don't know what is required/comfy.
The TCAHMAN repository would utilize our existing mirror
infrastructure, and would be a great service to offer third-party
developers.
We discussed CPAN, from which a lot of people blindly and trustingly
download module upon module, as root. How did this get so trusted?
Who is responsible for the code? We hear that nobody owns CPAN, and
there is no identifiable target for any legal action anyone might
want to bring. This obviously wouldn't fly for the ASF.
The designated front for TCAHMAN would be modules.apache.org, which
is currently run by Covalent. We would run TCAHMAN on our own
infrastructure, so we'd need to get the vhost back from them. While
this is technically really easy (we own the DNS for apache.org, after
all), it would be a good thing to arrange a smooth transition.
Every module uploaded to the network would come with metadata,
including (but not limited to):
* License
* Versioning (compatible with (1.3, 2.0, 2.1, ...), not before, not
after (MMN?))
* Documentation URL
* Author info
* Build options
Tasks:
* Write apxs++
* Define module metadata
* Write the backend
* Take back modules.apache.org
That's all I have right now. Remarks? Comments? Additions? Flames?
Please discuss: we need to find out whether there is community
support for the idea.
Thanks,
Sander
On Jul 21, 2005, at 3:14 AM, Sander Temme wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
All who are at ApacheCon or are otherwise interested,
I snatched a BOF slot tonight (Thursday the 21st) at 20:30 to
discuss ideas for dealing with modules inside and outside the httpd
distribution.
This is so far just an idea... I named it TCAHMAN (pronounced
"Tikkaman") for The Comprehensive Apache Httpd Module Archive Network.
The basic premise is to run:
$ ./configure (...) --with-tcahman-shared=funkymod (...)
and configure will contact the tcahman server (a.k.a.
modules.apache.org), download the source code for funkymod and
compile it into the server as an so. Or, it could access a locally
downloaded module tarball in case the build box can't see the net:
$ ./configure (...) --with-tcahman=/path/to/funkymod.tar.gz
will find the tarball in the file system and compile it
(statically, in this case) into the server. In a similar fashion,
an installed httpd could come with a script that can download,
build and install a module on the existing server. Perhaps an
enhancement to APXS? For instance:
$ apxs build --with-tcahman=funkymod
On the server side of TCAHMAN, the main issue is Organization. I
would like to model this after CPAN, but I have no idea how CPAN
works.... in any case, what we'd need is a standard for what module
code and its meta-data looks like: proper autoconf language to get
it built, name and description for the search engine, which Apache
version(s) the tarball works with, etc. The other side of the
organization aspect is who gets to upload modules to this archive.
Do we just open it up? Or do we impose any regulations on code
quality or evilness? Who gets to enforce this (major time sink
danger here)? What language would we use to make sure people don't
attribute uploads of third-party code to us? Will
modules.apache.org have a feedback engine where users can tell
module developers their shit is broken?
This or a similar construction would provide people who build httpd
easier access to third-party modules. It would also provide a way
out for modules we might not want in the core distribution anymore,
but would still like to make available. It gives module authors
visibility to users, to get their code in front of people who might
want to run it.
Let's bat this around tonight and see if this is something we want
to do, and how we would go about it. Is there any beer left over
from the Hackathon?
S.
- --
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.temme.net/sander/
PGP FP: 51B4 8727 466A 0BC3 69F4 B7B8 B2BE BC40 1529 24AF
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFC33WCnjkrwtLH+RIRAl2eAJwITvvpbf297JUUVg2e1kPsWPiLpQCfTbCU
2y4cd6SZ+Rj83JO2IEY2y2E=
=RwhU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- --
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.temme.net/sander/
PGP FP: 51B4 8727 466A 0BC3 69F4 B7B8 B2BE BC40 1529 24AF
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFDHgMFnjkrwtLH+RIRAp4EAJ0TaTQlSQtA1JCdgIzALJujkWQgXgCbBBhe
0oQzh2TiZ0QKyxqwZv70hQM=
=7qs5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
