Re: Changing mod_lua to stable
On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 8:23 PM Daniel Gruno wrote: > > I've been pondering on the state of mod_lua, and it seems like it's time > to get rid of the 'experimental' note, which still scares off a lot of > people. The API has been steady over the past few years, I believe, and > the code itself seems to be in a stable state, so I'm inclined to go > ahead and get it moved over to stable, including switching from CTR to RTC. > > I think a lazy 72h consensus should do nicely here, WDYT? +1
Re: [PATCH] mod_deflate: hardcoded "%ld" -> APR_OFF_T_FMT
On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 5:40 PM William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 7:27 AM Yann Ylavic wrote: >> >> >> Since it's logging only, it may be easier to cast to (long) each >> total_in/out though. > > Downcast? Why not upcast to apr_off_t and use the _FMT macro as first > suggested? Neither is ideal I think since in the unsigned long case that's still a cast to signed off_t. But yes, upcast is better, while at it I'd go for uint64_t...
Re: Changing mod_lua to stable
Sent from my iPhone > On Dec 17, 2018, at 4:58 PM, Christophe JAILLET > wrote: > > Hi, > > sorry for the inconvenience. You receive these emails because you have > subscribe to the list in the past. > Information to unsubscribe from the list is given at > https://httpd.apache.org/lists.html#http-dev > > In other words, just send an email to 'dev-unsubscr...@httpd.apache.org' and > it should be enough. > > CJ > > Ok thank you . And thanks for your time .. > >> Le 17/12/2018 à 22:43, Ken Wilson a écrit : >> Could you please remove me from your bull ..thAnks >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> On Dec 17, 2018, at 4:30 PM, Christophe JAILLET wrote: Le 17/12/2018 à 20:23, Daniel Gruno a écrit : Hi folks, I've been pondering on the state of mod_lua, and it seems like it's time to get rid of the 'experimental' note, which still scares off a lot of people. The API has been steady over the past few years, I believe, and the code itself seems to be in a stable state, so I'm inclined to go ahead and get it moved over to stable, including switching from CTR to RTC. I think a lazy 72h consensus should do nicely here, WDYT? With regards, Daniel. >>> +1 >>> >>> CJ >>> >> >
Re: Changing mod_lua to stable
Hi, sorry for the inconvenience. You receive these emails because you have subscribe to the list in the past. Information to unsubscribe from the list is given at https://httpd.apache.org/lists.html#http-dev In other words, just send an email to 'dev-unsubscr...@httpd.apache.org' and it should be enough. CJ Le 17/12/2018 à 22:43, Ken Wilson a écrit : Could you please remove me from your bull ..thAnks Sent from my iPhone On Dec 17, 2018, at 4:30 PM, Christophe JAILLET wrote: Le 17/12/2018 à 20:23, Daniel Gruno a écrit : Hi folks, I've been pondering on the state of mod_lua, and it seems like it's time to get rid of the 'experimental' note, which still scares off a lot of people. The API has been steady over the past few years, I believe, and the code itself seems to be in a stable state, so I'm inclined to go ahead and get it moved over to stable, including switching from CTR to RTC. I think a lazy 72h consensus should do nicely here, WDYT? With regards, Daniel. +1 CJ
Re: Changing mod_lua to stable
Could you please remove me from your bull ..thAnks Sent from my iPhone > On Dec 17, 2018, at 4:30 PM, Christophe JAILLET > wrote: > >> Le 17/12/2018 à 20:23, Daniel Gruno a écrit : >> Hi folks, >> I've been pondering on the state of mod_lua, and it seems like it's time to >> get rid of the 'experimental' note, which still scares off a lot of people. >> The API has been steady over the past few years, I believe, and the code >> itself seems to be in a stable state, so I'm inclined to go ahead and get it >> moved over to stable, including switching from CTR to RTC. >> >> I think a lazy 72h consensus should do nicely here, WDYT? >> >> With regards, >> Daniel. >> > +1 > > CJ >
Re: Changing mod_lua to stable
Le 17/12/2018 à 20:23, Daniel Gruno a écrit : Hi folks, I've been pondering on the state of mod_lua, and it seems like it's time to get rid of the 'experimental' note, which still scares off a lot of people. The API has been steady over the past few years, I believe, and the code itself seems to be in a stable state, so I'm inclined to go ahead and get it moved over to stable, including switching from CTR to RTC. I think a lazy 72h consensus should do nicely here, WDYT? With regards, Daniel. +1 CJ
Re: Changing mod_lua to stable
+1 On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 2:43 PM Ruediger Pluem wrote: > > > On 12/17/2018 08:23 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: > > Hi folks, > > I've been pondering on the state of mod_lua, and it seems like it's time > to get rid of the 'experimental' note, which > > still scares off a lot of people. The API has been steady over the past > few years, I believe, and the code itself seems > > to be in a stable state, so I'm inclined to go ahead and get it moved > over to stable, including switching from CTR to RTC. > > +1 > > Regards > > Rüdiger >
Re: Changing mod_lua to stable
On 12/17/2018 08:23 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: > Hi folks, > I've been pondering on the state of mod_lua, and it seems like it's time to > get rid of the 'experimental' note, which > still scares off a lot of people. The API has been steady over the past few > years, I believe, and the code itself seems > to be in a stable state, so I'm inclined to go ahead and get it moved over to > stable, including switching from CTR to RTC. +1 Regards Rüdiger
Re: Changing mod_lua to stable
On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 2:23 PM Daniel Gruno wrote: > > Hi folks, > I've been pondering on the state of mod_lua, and it seems like it's time > to get rid of the 'experimental' note, which still scares off a lot of > people. The API has been steady over the past few years, I believe, and > the code itself seems to be in a stable state, so I'm inclined to go > ahead and get it moved over to stable, including switching from CTR to RTC. +1
Re: Changing mod_lua to stable
On 12/17/18 8:23 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: Hi folks, I've been pondering on the state of mod_lua, and it seems like it's time to get rid of the 'experimental' note, which still scares off a lot of people. The API has been steady over the past few years, I believe, and the code itself seems to be in a stable state, so I'm inclined to go ahead and get it moved over to stable, including switching from CTR to RTC. I think a lazy 72h consensus should do nicely here, WDYT? I should probably add that we've been using it at the ASF for years now, in production, with very few issues related to the actual module (and then a bunch related to us making terrible lua scripts :p) With regards, Daniel.
Changing mod_lua to stable
Hi folks, I've been pondering on the state of mod_lua, and it seems like it's time to get rid of the 'experimental' note, which still scares off a lot of people. The API has been steady over the past few years, I believe, and the code itself seems to be in a stable state, so I'm inclined to go ahead and get it moved over to stable, including switching from CTR to RTC. I think a lazy 72h consensus should do nicely here, WDYT? With regards, Daniel.
Re: [PATCH] mod_deflate: hardcoded "%ld" -> APR_OFF_T_FMT
On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 7:27 AM Yann Ylavic wrote: > > Since it's logging only, it may be easier to cast to (long) each > total_in/out though. > Downcast? Why not upcast to apr_off_t and use the _FMT macro as first suggested?
