Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Rainer Jung
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 6. Mai 2009 15:10
An: dev@httpd.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Backports from trunk to 2.2 proxy-balancers
On 06.05.2009 14:39, Jim Jagielski wrote:
It would certainly be easier to maintain a 2.2-proxy
branch, with the
intent of it actually being folded *into* 2.2, if the
branch used the
same dir structure as trunk, that is, a separate directory
that includes
the balancer methods (as well as the config magic
associated with it).
However, if that will be a impediment to actually *getting* these
backports into 2.2, then I'm willing to keep the old structure...
So my question is: if to be able to easily backport the
various trunk
proxy improvements into 2.2, we also need to backport the dir
structure as well, is that OK? I don't want to work down that
path only to have it wasted work because people think that such a
directory restructure doesn't make sense within a 2.2.x release.
PS: NO, I am not considering this for 2.2.12! :)
I guess at the heart of this is the question, how likely we break some
part of the users build process for 2.2.x. My feeling is, that the
additional sub directory for the balancing method implementations is a
small change and users build process should not break due to this
additional one directory.
On the positive side apart from easier backports: the new subdirectory
might make people more curious on how to add a custom
balancing method,
so we get a slightly better visibility for the existing
provider interface.
The problem is that this breaks existing configurations for 2.2.x
as the balancers are now in separate modules. Thus I am -0.5 on
backporting this directory structure to 2.2.x.
May be we could keep the file structure but change the logic to the new one.
For the external proxy_balancer_method we could detect old and new ones
no? (We have the NULL for that).
Cheers
Jean-Frederic
Regards
Rüdiger
