Geoffrey Young wrote:
You know what? I think we should educate the users to use env vars.
doesn't that sorta happen now - throw an error message if it can't find a suitable Apache? granted, it could be more explicit, maybe even including your CPAN shell one-liner below.
Yes, by 'educating' I meant to document it better, more prominent.
The problem is that we have two mod_perl versions, so setting the APACHE env var is not a solution, since how do we set it for 2 versions. What I mean is, I'd like to have a set of env vars in my .profile/.cshrc/.whatever and never think twice, just selecting the version I want to build with. So I'd have:
env MOD_PERL=1 perl -MCPAN -eshell and env MOD_PERL=2 perl -MCPAN -eshell
if we could achieve that, it'd be fantastic. So may be we need to support APACHE and APACHE2, APXS and APXS2, so if we see MOD_PERL=2, we look for APACHE2 and APXS2 env vars.
well, I can see how that would benefit developers, but I'm not so sure that we have to go through all that trouble for end-users. typically, they would be using/developing either one version or the other and not messing around with both (at least not in the volume that you do :) so, I'd expect that educating them as to
Not everybody, but some will need to work with both. Why not making it easier for them.
$ APXS=/usr/local/apache2/bin/apxs perl -MCPAN -eshell
is quite sufficient. personally, I have apache1 and apache2 aliases set up to do my exporting for me :)
I was thinking about having the env vars set in the startup file. So later on you just have to set MOD_PERL=2 or MOD_PERL=1.
So I do propose to change Apache::Test to use: APXS APACHE APACHE_GROUP APACHE_USER APACHE_PORT when it detects mod_perl 1.0 and to use: APXS2 APACHE2 APACHE2_GROUP APACHE2_USER APACHE2_PORT when it detects mod_perl 2.0.
Anybody has a problem with this change? Conceptually of course, I doubt anybody has to change their code or anything (other than you, Geoff, and me).
I'm also still bothered with this MOD_PERL vs. MODPERL thing, we really need to stick to a single way to write it. (same for macros.)
yeah.
I think that since we have a casted in stone $ENV{MOD_PERL}, we should stick with the underscore everywhere else.
For XS code we have used -DMOD_PERL, my question is whether we should have -DMOD_PERL2 or -DMOD_PERL=2
> Also I'm planning to release Apache::Test on CPAN soon. What do you think?
that's great. actually, its a long time in coming.
;)
if you're thinking about doing this, a mod_perl 2.0 CPAN release might also be nice
What do you mean? It's been released every time a new version was announced. It's just invisible through indexer, because of the _09 segment. You can still get it from doug's CPAN dir.
- that way you can have a PREREQ_PM mod_perl version that corresponds to an Apache::Test CPAN release, thus making third party modules (or said article :) that support mod_perl 1.99_09 capable of being used as examples of how Apache::Test works for both 2.0 and (if you want to get it from CPAN) 1.0. I don't mean to say that this will be required for each release, but we've come pretty far on third party module support recently so it would be nice to have them in sync once we settle down.
I plan to keep Apache::Test, distributed with mod_perl 2.0 as well as separately. I'm not sure what are asking for. Can you please explain?
Should we release Apache::Test as 1.0 or 0.01? I think it deserves to have version 1.0.
__________________________________________________________________ Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
