On Jan 2, 2008, at 12:25 PM, Nick Kew wrote:
On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 11:56:23 -0500
Jim Jagielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yes, I saw that, but I wanted to dig deeper and read his Email
on why he didn't like it... Until that's resolved, the SS
still exists (though with a caveat)
In summary, I don't think that patch should spill outside
mod_proxy_ftp.
Putting it on the mod_proxy config, and hence involving changes to
mod_proxy.h API and ap_mmn, seems like superfluous complexity/bloat.
Especially when most mod_proxy users won't be requiring mod_proxy_ftp.
But that's not a veto, just a -0.
And a valid point...
