Re: mod_perl userbase care

2005-03-24 Thread Christopher H. Laco
Joe Schaefer wrote: Stas Bekman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Joe Schaefer wrote: [...] Then let's flesh out the consequences, and assume it will be fixed in 2.2. What I'm having difficulty understanding here is this: how does renaming Apache::FilterRec to Apache2::FilterRec now make any differe

Re: mod_perl userbase care

2005-03-24 Thread Joe Schaefer
Stas Bekman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Why not? How can you decide for a user that it's OK for them > to have mp1 and mp2.0 at the same time, but not mp2.0 and mp2 It's not a question of ok or not ok; it's a question of interface compatibility. You simply cannot have two incompatible Apache:

Re: mod_perl userbase care

2005-03-24 Thread Stas Bekman
Joe Schaefer wrote: Stas Bekman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Joe Schaefer wrote: [...] Then let's flesh out the consequences, and assume it will be fixed in 2.2. What I'm having difficulty understanding here is this: how does renaming Apache::FilterRec to Apache2::FilterRec now make any differe

Re: mod_perl userbase care

2005-03-24 Thread Joe Schaefer
Stas Bekman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Joe Schaefer wrote: [...] >> Then let's flesh out the consequences, and assume it will be >> fixed in 2.2. What I'm having difficulty understanding >> here is this: how does renaming Apache::FilterRec to >> Apache2::FilterRec now make any difference wh

Re: mod_perl userbase care

2005-03-24 Thread Stas Bekman
Joe Schaefer wrote: Stas Bekman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Everything and anything is possible. I believe that bug in filter stack is a showstopper for Apache 2.2 release. And Justin has said precisely that it'll be fixed in 2.2, when I've reported it some 2 years ago. Then let's flesh out the

Re: mod_perl userbase care

2005-03-24 Thread Joe Schaefer
Stas Bekman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Everything and anything is possible. I believe that bug in filter > stack is a showstopper for Apache 2.2 release. And Justin has said > precisely that it'll be fixed in 2.2, when I've reported it some 2 > years ago. Then let's flesh out the consequences

Re: mod_perl userbase care

2005-03-24 Thread Stas Bekman
Joe Schaefer wrote: Stas Bekman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Here is an example I've mentioned before. mp2.2 major release may be required really soon if the filters stack will be changed in Apache 2.2, since it'll make some of the filtering API different in an incompatible way with 2.0. I think i

Re: mod_perl userbase care

2005-03-24 Thread Joe Schaefer
Stas Bekman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Here is an example I've mentioned before. mp2.2 major release may be > required really soon if the filters stack will be changed in Apache > 2.2, since it'll make some of the filtering API different in an > incompatible way with 2.0. I think it's also jus

Re: independent version tracking per-Apache-module (was: mod_perl userbase care)

2005-03-23 Thread Dominique Quatravaux
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Stas Bekman wrote: | You aren't planning for the future. When a new even slightly | incompatible release will be made, by doing the currently suggested | change, you will be forced to rename all the APIs again. And | again. And again. Point understood,

Re: mod_perl userbase care

2005-03-22 Thread Stas Bekman
Geoffrey Young wrote: so, what specifically did you have in mind, on this single issue, when you say that a rename will make matters worse than they are now? You aren't planning for the future. I don't think that answers my question, but ok :) What part have I missed? The "the 50 million modules

Re: mod_perl userbase care

2005-03-22 Thread Stas Bekman
Geoffrey Young wrote: Untill now, with a few little changes or sometimes with no changes at all (depending on what API was used) they could have the code running under mp1 and mp2. With this rename they either need to split their code and maintain different versions, which are otherwise identical,

Re: mod_perl userbase care

2005-03-22 Thread Geoffrey Young
> Untill > now, with a few little changes or sometimes with no changes at all > (depending on what API was used) they could have the code running under > mp1 and mp2. With this rename they either need to split their code and > maintain different versions, which are otherwise identical, or have an

Re: mod_perl userbase care

2005-03-22 Thread Stas Bekman
Dominique Quatravaux wrote: [...] I think all of these folks are quite able to do a quick s/use Apache::/use Apache2::/ or something: none of the proposals so far are rocket science, really. Actually we can (and are eager to!) deal with I'm afraid this is exactly where people fail to see the proble

Re: mod_perl userbase care (was: nuking old mod_perls before installing unstable)

2005-03-22 Thread Dominique Quatravaux
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 (Due to my recent series of blunders on this list, I wonder if stepping up this particular plate is wise. Oh well :-) Stas Bekman wrote: | From the developer's point of view, this rename is insane. You | spend most of your time coding using the API. You