At 07:39 AM 11/9/2001, Perrin Harkins wrote: > > This is exactly the right way to do it. I've been posting off and on for > > over a year on the Mod_perl list (usually now to encourage people to start > > naming things right) that making something into an Apache::* module really > > sucks unless that's what it really is because it confuses people into > > thinking the module is apache only when it might not be (eg >Apache::Session > > or Apache::DBI naming really annoys me)... > >I'm with you on Apache::Session, the most mis-named module of all time, but >Apache::DBI really is mod_perl-only. It uses a PerlCleanupHandler.
While this is true and I can understand your point of view, my experience is that Apache::DBI requires minor couple-line type change to make it work with PerlEx, SpeedyCGI etc... This makes it annoying that it only exists in Apache::* namespace. It's a catch-22, not many people (I imagine) feel comfortable with submitting non-mod_perl patches to Apache::DBI because it is forever called Apache::DBI (by design) and vice versa, Apache::DBI has no reason officially to change its name while it is still mod_perl specific. Whereas, it would have been more interesting to call it DBI::CacheHandle (or something like this) with a note stating that it was built for mod_perl and that other persistent perl engines are invited to submit patches for their own systems.
