Re[2]: Default Modules

2005-04-07 Thread Astrid Keßler
>>I changed mod_imap this morning from 'yes' to 'most', because I was >>tired of disabling it every time I do a new install. I think we >>should reconsider what modules are enabled by default. Here is my >>list of suggested changes: >> >>mod_version: all -> yes +-0, no opinion >>mod_asis: yes -

Re: Default Modules

2005-04-07 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Apr 6, 2005, at 12:26 PM, Rici Lake wrote: default: modules which would be used in virtually any useful httpd server most: modules which would be regularly used in a non-minimal httpd server all: modules which are useful and stable no: modules which are deprecated, experimental, or examples

Re: Default Modules

2005-04-06 Thread Dirk-Willem van Gulik
On Wed, 6 Apr 2005, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > I do wish it were renamed to mod_imagemap though! mod_imap is a poor name. +1 - lets leave the 80ties behind us :-) Dw.

Re: Default Modules

2005-04-06 Thread Rici Lake
On 6-Apr-05, at 12:56 PM, Mads Toftum wrote: mod_asis: yes -> no I'd prefer -> most as it is rarely used but not totally useless. Others mentioned mod_ssl which I think is too much trouble to be worth enabling other than when requested explicitly - there's the whole crypto regs issue and it does

Re: Default Modules

2005-04-06 Thread André Malo
* William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > At 01:41 PM 4/6/2005, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > >--On Wednesday, April 6, 2005 1:30 PM -0400 Rich Bowen > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >I do wish it were renamed to mod_imagemap though! mod_imap is a poor > > name. > > ++1 - 8.3 filenames are so 1980 :) > >

Re: Default Modules

2005-04-06 Thread André Malo
* Paul Querna wrote: > I changed mod_imap this morning from 'yes' to 'most', because I was > tired of disabling it every time I do a new install. I think we should > reconsider what modules are enabled by default. Here is my list of > suggested changes: > > mod_version: all -> yes +1. > mod_as

Re: Default Modules

2005-04-06 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
At 01:41 PM 4/6/2005, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: >--On Wednesday, April 6, 2005 1:30 PM -0400 Rich Bowen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >wrote: > >I do wish it were renamed to mod_imagemap though! mod_imap is a poor name. ++1 - 8.3 filenames are so 1980 :) We are changing a number of other module names, thi

Re: Default Modules

2005-04-06 Thread Mads Toftum
On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 09:15:38AM -0700, Paul Querna wrote: > I changed mod_imap this morning from 'yes' to 'most', because I was > tired of disabling it every time I do a new install. I think we should > reconsider what modules are enabled by default. Here is my list of > suggested changes:

Re: Default Modules

2005-04-06 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
At 11:15 AM 4/6/2005, you wrote: >I changed mod_imap this morning from 'yes' to 'most', because I was tired of >disabling it every time I do a new install. I think we should reconsider what >modules are enabled by default. Here is my list of suggested changes: > >mod_version: all -> yes >mod_as

Re: Default Modules

2005-04-06 Thread Justin Erenkrantz
--On Wednesday, April 6, 2005 1:30 PM -0400 Rich Bowen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Have you ever used mod_imap? Or, at least, since 1996? I have a hard Yes. Yes. I do wish it were renamed to mod_imagemap though! mod_imap is a poor name. Note that we could always re-introduce the imagemap CGI pro

Re: Default Modules

2005-04-06 Thread Rich Bowen
Justin Erenkrantz wrote: >> mod_asis: yes -> no >> mod_imap: most -> no > > > I would prefer we keep mod_imap as most. Probably the same for > mod_asis. These were default modules in 2.0 - therefore, I think > disabling them unless explicit in 2.2 could be wor

Re: Default Modules

2005-04-06 Thread Nick Kew
Rich Bowen wrote: > Paul Querna wrote: > >>I changed mod_imap this morning from 'yes' to 'most', because I was >>tired of disabling it every time I do a new install. I think we should >>reconsider what modules are enabled by default. Here is my list of >>suggested changes: >> >>mod_version: all

Re: Default Modules

2005-04-06 Thread Justin Erenkrantz
fault. Here is my list of suggested changes: mod_version: all -> yes Sure. mod_asis: yes -> no mod_imap: most -> no I would prefer we keep mod_imap as most. Probably the same for mod_asis. These were default modules in 2.0 - therefore, I think disabling them unless explicit in 2.2 could be

Re: Default Modules

2005-04-06 Thread Justin Erenkrantz
--On Wednesday, April 6, 2005 12:29 PM -0400 Rich Bowen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: How about mod_ssl being on in "most"? In the past, we've said that SSL must be explicit because of the crypto legal restrictions. -- justin

Re: Default Modules

2005-04-06 Thread Rich Bowen
Paul Querna wrote: > I changed mod_imap this morning from 'yes' to 'most', because I was > tired of disabling it every time I do a new install. I think we should > reconsider what modules are enabled by default. Here is my list of > suggested changes: > > mod_version: all -> yes > mod_asis: yes

Re: Default Modules

2005-04-06 Thread Rici Lake
s: mod_version: all -> yes mod_asis: yes -> no mod_imap: most -> no mod_dumpio: most -> all +1 to all of those. I would also add: mod_ident: most -> no mod_ssl: no -> all mod_proxy (and friends) no -> all I'm basing that on the following criteria: default: modules which would

Default Modules

2005-04-06 Thread Paul Querna
I changed mod_imap this morning from 'yes' to 'most', because I was tired of disabling it every time I do a new install. I think we should reconsider what modules are enabled by default. Here is my list of suggested changes: mod_version: all -> yes mod_asis: yes -> no mod_imap: most -> no mod