> 2 dangerous thoughts :) > > 1. I forget... is mod_proxy it's own project (ala apr?) If not, > it should be. mod_proxy is currently a sub-project of httpd. I don't believe mod_proxy makes sense as a completely separate project, although a sub-project does. > 2. There was some initial discussion on having mod_rewrite > also follow a similar path. Certainly it was a good idea > for mod_proxy. Maybe it could help mod_rewrite as well. it couldn't hurt. Ryan _______________________________________________________________________________ Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED] 406 29th St. San Francisco, CA 94131 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Re: [VOTE] mod_proxy in? David Reid
- Re: [VOTE] mod_proxy in? Jim Jagielski
- Re: [VOTE] mod_proxy in? Chuck Murcko
- Re: [VOTE] mod_proxy in? Chuck Murcko
- Re: [VOTE] mod_proxy in? Greg Stein
- Re: [VOTE] mod_proxy in? Chuck Murcko
- Re: [VOTE] mod_proxy in? Bill Stoddard
- Re: [VOTE] mod_proxy in? William A. Rowe, Jr.
- Re: [VOTE] mod_proxy in? Graham Leggett
- Re: [VOTE] mod_proxy in? Jim Jagielski
- Re: [VOTE] mod_proxy in? rbb
- Re: [VOTE] mod_proxy in? Graham Leggett
- Build system that could integra... Sean Chittenden
- Re: [VOTE] mod_proxy in? Graham Leggett
- RE: [VOTE] mod_proxy in? Ian Holsman
- Re: [VOTE] mod_proxy in? Jim Jagielski
- Re: [VOTE] mod_proxy in? Chuck Murcko
- Re: [VOTE] mod_proxy in? Iain Brown
- Re: [VOTE] mod_proxy in? Eli Marmor
- RE: [VOTE] mod_proxy in? Ian Holsman
- Re: [VOTE] mod_proxy in? Chuck Murcko
