* Graham Leggett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [replying to multiple posts]
> André Malo wrote: > > >>Having proxy_ajp included in httpd v2.0 would be a good thing - there is > >>a base of users for it (with it's more advanced handling of things like > >>indicating secure connections, etc it's useful). > > > Hmm. I'd include rather in tomcat distribution than httpd-2.0. That seems > > to be way more logical. > > Tomcat is a Java package, proxy_ajp would be C code that integrates with > httpd. I would rather see such a module in httpd rather than have to > jump through hoops trying to get it to work as a separate module, as is > the case now, as it would be significantly more practical. Sure, I see the point. But please remember all the modules that are in the core distribution which had/have no active maintainer and which nobody understands anymore. Look at, say, mod_rewrite, it was just plain broken over 10 httpd versions or so. It's even not fully documented yet (and was written 1996 ...). Did anyone count all the '###', 'XXX' and 'TODO' marks in the code, we already maintain? Oh, and there's also bugzilla: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&bug_status=RESOLVED&bug_status=VERIFIED&email1=&emailtype1=substring&emailassigned_to1=1&email2=&emailtype2=substring&emailreporter2=1&bugidtype=include&bug_id=&changedin=&votes=&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=Now&chfieldvalue=&product=Apache+httpd-1.3&product=Apache+httpd-2.0&short_desc=&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&long_desc=&long_desc_type=allwordssubstr&bug_file_loc=&bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstr&keywords=&keywords_type=anywords&field0-0-0=noop&type0-0-0=noop&value0-0-0=&newqueryname=&order=bugs.bug_id 892 bugs found at time of this writing (hope the link won't break). Where's the user base of mod_imap (installed by default) or mod_cern_meta or the old outdated NCSA config directives? We add and add and add code -- which is not actually bad. But where's the man with the broom? Just to make sure, I'm not finally against adding a new module. But IMHO the much better way should be to improve the integration of TP modules rather than to put all of them in the core distribution. Yes, I know, I'm one of the guys who could help to change those things, if there'd be more time (see the problem we *already* have?). n "just my 0.02 EUR" d P.S.: please don't take my words as harsh as they may sound, my English is just ... technical ;-) -- "Solides und umfangreiches Buch" -- aus einer Rezension <http://pub.perlig.de/books.html#apache2>
