Re: Some ramblings on httpd config
On Jun 4, 2009, at 22:53, Graham Leggett wrote: This approach doesn't require any changes to httpd itself as the ability to do this becomes a feature of just the module supporting that scripting language, eg, mod_lua. The same could also be done for other scripting languages. So, if your aim is to be able to do everything within the one Apache configuration file, rather than out in separate scripts, this would seem in part to satisfy the requirement. I like this. In theory, you could have a mod_java, or anything really. As one of the folks who answers the How Do I questions every day, while that would indeed be neato and nifty, it behooves us to pick a configuration file syntax, not say do it in whatever language amuses you. We've had configuration in Perl for years, but we don't push it because most of our audience looks at us like aliens when we suggest it. The folks savvy enough to use the Perl configuration can go find it and do it that way, and can indeed do powerful things with it. But the vast majority of the folks that actually admin the server don't want to be told to script their configuration in the programming language of their choice. They want a howto recipe, and they want it to work without having fiddle about with learning complicated syntax. I'd also humbly request that we *not* put Lua in the configuration directives. If folks are configuring a virtual host, they aren't going to be looking for directives starting with Lua*. Over the years we seem to have moved from giving configuration directives whatever name sprang to mind, to giving them function-based names that people will actually find in the documentation. Let's not scrap that. Our users don't care that it's implemented in Lua, and shouldn't have to care. -- If we only live, We too will go to sea in a Sieve,--- To the hills of the Chankly Bore!
Re: Some ramblings on httpd config
Rich Bowen wrote: On Jun 4, 2009, at 22:53, Graham Leggett wrote: This approach doesn't require any changes to httpd itself as the ability to do this becomes a feature of just the module supporting that scripting language, eg, mod_lua. The same could also be done for other scripting languages. So, if your aim is to be able to do everything within the one Apache configuration file, rather than out in separate scripts, this would seem in part to satisfy the requirement. I like this. In theory, you could have a mod_java, or anything really. As one of the folks who answers the How Do I questions every day, while that would indeed be neato and nifty, it behooves us to pick a configuration file syntax, not say do it in whatever language amuses you. We've had configuration in Perl for years, but we don't push it because most of our audience looks at us like aliens when we suggest it. The folks savvy enough to use the Perl configuration can go find it and do it that way, and can indeed do powerful things with it. But the vast majority of the folks that actually admin the server don't want to be told to script their configuration in the programming language of their choice. They want a howto recipe, and they want it to work without having fiddle about with learning complicated syntax. I'd also humbly request that we *not* put Lua in the configuration directives. If folks are configuring a virtual host, they aren't going to be looking for directives starting with Lua*. Over the years we seem to have moved from giving configuration directives whatever name sprang to mind, to giving them function-based names that people will actually find in the documentation. Let's not scrap that. Our users don't care that it's implemented in Lua, and shouldn't have to care. I think I made the same point a little earlier, you have no argument from me. The point being made above was that it is possible for people to plug in scripting languages into the server hooks themselves. This may allow the flexibility of configuration and operation that people are looking for, while leaving the core method of configuration alone. Regards, Graham -- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Some ramblings on httpd config
2009/6/6 Rich Bowen rbo...@rcbowen.com: On Jun 4, 2009, at 22:53, Graham Leggett wrote: This approach doesn't require any changes to httpd itself as the ability to do this becomes a feature of just the module supporting that scripting language, eg, mod_lua. The same could also be done for other scripting languages. So, if your aim is to be able to do everything within the one Apache configuration file, rather than out in separate scripts, this would seem in part to satisfy the requirement. I like this. In theory, you could have a mod_java, or anything really. As one of the folks who answers the How Do I questions every day, while that would indeed be neato and nifty, it behooves us to pick a configuration file syntax, not say do it in whatever language amuses you. We've had configuration in Perl for years, but we don't push it because most of our audience looks at us like aliens when we suggest it. The folks savvy enough to use the Perl configuration can go find it and do it that way, and can indeed do powerful things with it. But the vast majority of the folks that actually admin the server don't want to be told to script their configuration in the programming language of their choice. They want a howto recipe, and they want it to work without having fiddle about with learning complicated syntax. I'd also humbly request that we *not* put Lua in the configuration directives. If folks are configuring a virtual host, they aren't going to be looking for directives starting with Lua*. Over the years we seem to have moved from giving configuration directives whatever name sprang to mind, to giving them function-based names that people will actually find in the documentation. Let's not scrap that. Our users don't care that it's implemented in Lua, and shouldn't have to care. This last example wasn't even related to driving configuration. It was in practice an actual handler hook implementation for request processing, not configuration phases. The intent is not to replace current Apache configuration mechanism but leave it as is. Was just highlighting for the convenience factor, for simple stuff, scripting modules allowing handler implementations to be defined in the Apache configuration file itself rather than in a separate file/module. Whether a particular scripting module does that would be up to that module. No intention to change the core of Apache. Thus, you might have this ability for request handler phase hook implementations to be in configuration file with mod_lua, mod_wsgi, mod_python, mod_tcl, mod_other_scripting language. I don't use mod_perl, but If I remember correctly, mod_perl only allows this for configuration generation and not for request handler phase hook implementations as talking about here. Anyway, this would all be a power user thing and not the only way of doing things and most certainly kept away from inexperienced people. Graham
