> On Fri, 20 Apr 2001, Bill Stoddard wrote:
>
> > Debugging another problem related to this patch got me to thinking....
> >
> > <vent>
> > Is this patch pedantic? I mean, what is wrong with letting mod_log_config handle
>the %c
directive
> > just as it always has? We are trying to file every single little nit in its tight
>little spot
at
> > the expense of maintainability. This code base is getting seriously complex.
>Stuff like this
makes
> > it even worse.
> > </vent>
>
> This patch is important, because it means that if I want to log something,
> I don't have to modify mod_log_config. Think of cookie logging. Why do
> we enable cookie logging if mod_usertrack isn't in the server? I want to
> be able to extend logging without modifying another module.
>
> yes, this may be a bit more complex, but it puts the onus of logging a
> feature on the code that implements the feature. I would much rather do
> that, then to put the onus on a completely unrelated logging module.
>
I very much like the idea of optional functions. I was specifically questioning moving
the %c
handling from mod_log_config to the core. Gotta get active writing some docs cause
some of this
stuff is seriously complicated. :-)
Bill
