But we could internally shortcut map_to_storage if transhandler has returned OK, no? Do we really need yet another hook?
I'm kinda against any kind of magic here. apache separates the hooks, probably for a good reason (even if we can't see it at the moment).
Would it still be an added value if we can make PerlTransHandler behave like 1.3 did?
perhaps, but I need to think about it more. the filename errors from map_to_storage have always bothered me, so we need to decide whether we tell API users to set a bogus filename, or write a PerlMapToStorageHandler, or live with the errors. or we have mod_perl do some action-at-a-distance thing.
lemme think about it some. but I'm almost always in favor of a 1 to 1 mapping of Apache hooks and mod_perl hooks, as it keeps with the idea that mod_perl is Perl access to the C API, rather than some magic inbetween API all it's own.
--Geoff
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
