Issac Goldstand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
[...] >> Sadly, I don't think this can go into the 2.x series because of our >> conversioning rules. >> New features need new symbols. SVN gets around this by doing: >> void foo (void) >> void foo2 (int) > Can you elaborate? I didn't understand that bit. The branch changes the behavior of apreq_handle_cgi(). The CGI specs make no guarantee about the existence of a QUERY_STRING env var when the url doesn't contain a "?" (you can't assume the webserver is apache), and the docs for apreq_handle_cgi() currently suck: "Create an apreq handle which is suitable for a CGI program. It reads input from stdin and writes output to stdout." >From the documentation, I have no idea what that the specified behavior is supposed to be, other than to say the symbol should "work" in any CGI environment. (Not sure even why it claims to write anything to stdout, since we don't bake() cookies anymore). As a user, when I see lame documentation like that for a symbol in a released library, I assume the devs haven't gotten around to docmenting the current behavior- not that they haven't yet decided what the behavior should be. So, IMO the branch has a long way to go before it's suitable for merging into trunk. At a minimum it needs documentation and tests for the new behavior. You also need to decide if this stuff is a 2.x feature, in which case a new module (could bundle with libapreq alongside cgi) might be more appropriate. Or is it a 3.0 feature, in which case changing the behavior of apreq_handle_cgi() is ok? -- Joe Schaefer
