Re: ap_max_requests_per_child isn't part of the API, is it?
ERROR: There is no such list ISN'T here. SOLUTION: Send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of 'info' (no quotes) for a list of available mailing lists. -- Sincerely, the Minimalist
RE: ap_max_requests_per_child isn't part of the API, is it?
--On Sunday, June 29, 2003 1:03 PM -0700 Marc M. Adkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A FAQ Wiki might be useful. Then we could copy chunks of emails into the wiki and later reference the wiki pages by URL. This would be a temporary collecting point for the data pending formal documentation, and as such might help to organize it. The ASF-wide Wiki on Nagoya has been vandalized a lot lately, and I'm not sure that any of the httpd developers want to oversee a public Wiki on top of everything else we currently do. Additionally, IIRC, the httpd docs group has decided they don't want to support a Wiki either. For potential FAQ items, I would suggest emailing them to [EMAIL PROTECTED] in the form of a patch to httpd-2.0/docs/manual/faq/index.xml. You could also send it to [EMAIL PROTECTED] as well, but you *might* get a better response on the docs list for FAQ entries. Unsure. -- justin
Re: ap_max_requests_per_child isn't part of the API, is it?
--On Saturday, June 28, 2003 8:24 AM -0400 Jeff Trawick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can anybody agree that something like this is is part of the formal definition of our API? Apache header files contain declarations for a number of variables and functions. Many of these are part of the API, while some of these are simply necessary for the division of the Apache implementation across many source files. Any such variables that are considered part of the API are declared with the AP_DECLARE_DATA qualifier. Here is an example from scoreboard.h: AP_DECLARE_DATA extern scoreboard *ap_scoreboard_image; Any such functions that are considered part of the API are declared with AP_DECLARE() or AP_DECLARE_NONSTD(). Examples include: AP_DECLARE(void) ap_add_common_vars(request_rec *r); AP_DECLARE_NONSTD(int) ap_rvputs(request_rec *r,...); In addition, hooks are declared with AP_DECLARE_HOOK() or APR_DECLARE_EXTERNAL_HOOK(). If the declaration of a variable or function does not include these special qualifiers, it is not part of the API, and beyond the fact that it is not intended for module use, modules will not be able to access the variable or function on all platforms, leading to obscure failures for the users of such modules. +1. -- justin
Re: ap_max_requests_per_child isn't part of the API, is it?
On Mon, Jun 30, 2003 at 09:25:55AM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: --On Saturday, June 28, 2003 8:24 AM -0400 Jeff Trawick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can anybody agree that something like this is is part of the formal definition of our API? ... +1. -- justin +1 here, also. Altho... I would prefer to see that stuff moved to httpd_private.h and just not include that file into our public docs (nor install it). Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Re: ap_max_requests_per_child isn't part of the API, is it?
Bennett, Tony - CNF wrote: Jeff, You referred to formal definition of our API Is it documented somewhere? not that I know of, but I think it would be good to start writing down some conclusions to questions like this
RE: ap_max_requests_per_child isn't part of the API, is it?
A FAQ Wiki might be useful. Then we could copy chunks of emails into the wiki and later reference the wiki pages by URL. This would be a temporary collecting point for the data pending formal documentation, and as such might help to organize it. mma -Original Message- From: Jeff Trawick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2003 5:52 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: ap_max_requests_per_child isn't part of the API, is it? Bennett, Tony - CNF wrote: Jeff, You referred to formal definition of our API Is it documented somewhere? not that I know of, but I think it would be good to start writing down some conclusions to questions like this
Re: ap_max_requests_per_child isn't part of the API, is it?
Jeff Trawick wrote: Some level of mod_php (presumably recent) won't load with Apache 2 on AIX, and the reason is that the decl of that variable in mpm_common.h isn't formally exported (AP_DECLARE_DATA). PHP should be using ap_mpm_query(), right? See http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21046 Can anybody agree that something like this is is part of the formal definition of our API? Apache header files contain declarations for a number of variables and functions. Many of these are part of the API, while some of these are simply necessary for the division of the Apache implementation across many source files. Any such variables that are considered part of the API are declared with the AP_DECLARE_DATA qualifier. Here is an example from scoreboard.h: AP_DECLARE_DATA extern scoreboard *ap_scoreboard_image; Any such functions that are considered part of the API are declared with AP_DECLARE() or AP_DECLARE_NONSTD(). Examples include: AP_DECLARE(void) ap_add_common_vars(request_rec *r); AP_DECLARE_NONSTD(int) ap_rvputs(request_rec *r,...); In addition, hooks are declared with AP_DECLARE_HOOK() or APR_DECLARE_EXTERNAL_HOOK(). If the declaration of a variable or function does not include these special qualifiers, it is not part of the API, and beyond the fact that it is not intended for module use, modules will not be able to access the variable or function on all platforms, leading to obscure failures for the users of such modules.
RE: ap_max_requests_per_child isn't part of the API, is it?
Jeff, You referred to formal definition of our API Is it documented somewhere? -tony -Original Message- From: Jeff Trawick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2003 5:25 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: ap_max_requests_per_child isn't part of the API, is it? Jeff Trawick wrote: Some level of mod_php (presumably recent) won't load with Apache 2 on AIX, and the reason is that the decl of that variable in mpm_common.h isn't formally exported (AP_DECLARE_DATA). PHP should be using ap_mpm_query(), right? See http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21046 Can anybody agree that something like this is is part of the formal definition of our API? Apache header files contain declarations for a number of variables and functions. Many of these are part of the API, while some of these are simply necessary for the division of the Apache implementation across many source files. Any such variables that are considered part of the API are declared with the AP_DECLARE_DATA qualifier. Here is an example from scoreboard.h: AP_DECLARE_DATA extern scoreboard *ap_scoreboard_image; Any such functions that are considered part of the API are declared with AP_DECLARE() or AP_DECLARE_NONSTD(). Examples include: AP_DECLARE(void) ap_add_common_vars(request_rec *r); AP_DECLARE_NONSTD(int) ap_rvputs(request_rec *r,...); In addition, hooks are declared with AP_DECLARE_HOOK() or APR_DECLARE_EXTERNAL_HOOK(). If the declaration of a variable or function does not include these special qualifiers, it is not part of the API, and beyond the fact that it is not intended for module use, modules will not be able to access the variable or function on all platforms, leading to obscure failures for the users of such modules.
