On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Stas Bekman wrote: > 1. The chdir issue with registry isn't resolved yet, need to do > something about it before mod_perl 2.0 will be really useful for people, > since want it or not, there are many users who want only the registry > interface.
sure, but not everybody using registry relies on using '.' in @INC or open "./foo"; @INC is easy to solve, just adding cwd to it for that request. open, exec, system, etc., that rely on '.' seems nasty to fix. users could change code for example, from: open "./foo"; to: use File::Basename; my $cwd = basename $0; open "$cwd/foo"; that'd work with both modperl and cgi. > 2. should we revert back to Apache::Registry from ModPerl::Registry, now > that we have: > > use Apache2 the current module names should stay. in part since the 1.x stuff will run with 2.0 if Apache::compat is loaded. a wrapper might be nice, but i'd rather wait a bit to see if people actually complain about have to change Apache::Registry to ModPerl::Registry in the config file. the compat goal has always focused on keeping 1.x _code_ running in 2.0. having to change config files is acceptable. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
