Re: Changing mod_lua to stable
On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 2:47 PM Chris Punches wrote: > Someone may want to add some text along the lines of when to use u/WSGI > instead of mod_lua as that's going to be a thing if this goes stable. If > the what/when isn't in there clearly we could run into really bad > situations like ASF using mod_lua to host web services in production. > As D.Gruno noted, we *already* use mod_lua in production at the ASF, and have seen zero problems with the module. Cheers, -g
Re: Changing mod_lua to stable
Someone may want to add some text along the lines of when to use u/WSGI instead of mod_lua as that's going to be a thing if this goes stable. If the what/when isn't in there clearly we could run into really bad situations like ASF using mod_lua to host web services in production. On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 2:36 PM Eric Covener wrote: > On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 2:12 PM Frank Kuhn wrote: > > > > > > > > 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. > > > [...] > > > > Hi, > > I have big problems with LuaOutputFilter and SetOutputFilter (see > > https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62726) so I cannot call > > it 'stable'... > > Stable from an API perspective, not bug-free. The disclaimer we have > used recently for experimental is: > > > This module is experimental. Its behaviors, directives, and defaults are > subject to more change from release to release relative to other standard > modules. Users are encouraged to consult the "CHANGES" file for potential > updates. >
Re: Changing mod_lua to stable
On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 2:12 PM Frank Kuhn wrote: > > > > 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. > > [...] > > Hi, > I have big problems with LuaOutputFilter and SetOutputFilter (see > https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62726) so I cannot call > it 'stable'... Stable from an API perspective, not bug-free. The disclaimer we have used recently for experimental is: > This module is experimental. Its behaviors, directives, and defaults are > subject to more change from release to release relative to other standard > modules. Users are encouraged to consult the "CHANGES" file for potential > updates.
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. [...] Hi, I have big problems with LuaOutputFilter and SetOutputFilter (see https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62726) so I cannot call it 'stable'... Best regars, Frank. P.S.: And when I am not wrong https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62359 also needs some work... And while looking at this someone should also look at the whole list: https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_status=__open__=mod_lua=Apache%20httpd-2
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: 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.
