Paul Querna wrote:
> Ian Holsman wrote:
>
>> Also I would start discussing with some of the other 1.3-only module
>> writers out there on how to port their stuff to 2.0, or port it for them.
>
>
> There are not many left now Just those mod_perl guys, and they are
> at 1.99.9.
I think
At 03:30 PM 3/1/2005, Ian Holsman wrote:
>The biggest hurdle 2.0 has had to face IMO is:
>- 1.3 isn't broken
>- we run 1.3 already
>- module XYZ only runs on 1.3
>- 2.0 doesn't do anything that 1.3 doesn't do anyway
>
>What I would suggest for your marketing campaign would be to write and submit
>
Wayne S. Frazee wrote:
Jess Holle writes:
The use cases are:
1. multiple organizations, each with their own LDAP wish to allow
their personnel into a common site -- each has its own, separately
administered LDAP
2. a single organization has a read-only internal LDAP and a writable
Ian Holsman wrote:
Also I would start discussing with some of the other 1.3-only module
writers out there on how to port their stuff to 2.0, or port it for them.
There are not many left now Just those mod_perl guys, and they are
at 1.99.9. Are there any other modules you were thinking o
Jess Holle writes:
The use cases are:
1. multiple organizations, each with their own LDAP wish to allow
their personnel into a common site -- each has its own, separately
administered LDAP
2. a single organization has a read-only internal LDAP and a writable
LDAP for external g
Ian Holsman writes:
Also I would start discussing with some of the other 1.3-only module
writers out there on how to port their stuff to 2.0, or port it for them.
Ian, your note on apache promotion via whitepaper is well taken. Is anyone
aware of existing papers on the subject (specifically, a
The biggest hurdle 2.0 has had to face IMO is:
- 1.3 isn't broken
- we run 1.3 already
- module XYZ only runs on 1.3
- 2.0 doesn't do anything that 1.3 doesn't do anyway
What I would suggest for your marketing campaign would be to write and
submit several technical articles about apache2 and how i
Paul Querna wrote:
Andrà Malo wrote:
I personally believe, that there is actually no problem to solve.
While we are free to write the software we like, people are free to
use the software they like. I have no desire to "force" someone to use
either version.
But that's my very humble opinion ;-)
That's what you get for suggesting marketing to techies, Wayne. Anyway I was
thinking the same thing. Heck the "puzzling thread" provided some good
marketing fodder already:
Bojan Smojver wrote:
...Given that all major Linux and other distros ship Apache 2 as a
default web server, it's only a ma
Andrà Malo wrote:
I personally believe, that there is actually no problem to solve. While we
are free to write the software we like, people are free to use the software
they like. I have no desire to "force" someone to use either version.
But that's my very humble opinion ;-)
Marketing isn't abou
* Wayne S. Frazee wrote:
> As I sat reading the responses to the new development thread on
> acceptance of Apache 2 and some users' regression to 1.3, it struck me
> when someone mentioned that they believed part of the problem to be
> marketing. Mozilla advertised firefox with a large one-time i
On Tue, Mar 01, 2005 at 08:05:30PM +, Wayne S. Frazee wrote:
> Looking for feedback, legal, devils advocate, et al on the concept, if not
> the execution.
I don't think professional, competent Webserver administrators generally
respond well to marketing. In my experience, they (we!) prefer a
I entreat each potential responder to this email to please read it all the
way through and THEN respond rather than knee-jerk something based on only
the first paragraph or two...
As I sat reading the responses to the new development thread on acceptance
of Apache 2 and some users' regression
I can't find anywhere an explanation about external hooks and the use
of the APR_DECLARE_EXTERNAL_HOOK macro. Is there anyone that has some
experience with them and can provide clarifications??
Thanks in advance.
Luca
On 01.03.2005, at 15:18, Graham Leggett wrote:
Paul A Houle said:
I think of all the features that web site authors and developers
need that still don't exist in mainstream web servers; part of this
is in the area of "content management" and another major are is
authentication -- pretty much
On 01.03.2005, at 15:52, Sean Mehan wrote:
Just a pointer to something that is gaining a bit of ground in various
circles:
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/11511/sstc-saml-
tech-overview-2.0-draft-03.pdf
found at
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/documents.php?wg_abbrev=sec
Graham Leggett wrote:
Jess Holle said:
Also a module (for Apache 2, not 1.3) that could use multiple LDAP
repositories -- and not for failover, but for separate user communities
-- all for a single resource/directory would be *very* helpful.
Can mod_authnz_ldap not do th
"Graham Leggett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Joe Schaefer said:
>
>>> Something like an auth module that can do "form based" auth, in
>>> addition to "basic" and "digest" etc would probably be very useful.
>>
>> apreq does that.
>
> What is apreq?
Its an httpd subproject. Basically its a serve
Just a pointer to something that is gaining a bit of ground in various
circles:
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/11511/sstc-saml-tech-
overview-2.0-draft-03.pdf
found at
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/documents.php?wg_abbrev=security
This is about SAML, a vocabulary for
Jess Holle said:
> Also a module (for Apache 2, not 1.3) that could use multiple LDAP
> repositories -- and not for failover, but for separate user communities
> -- all for a single resource/directory would be *very* helpful.
Can mod_authnz_ldap not do this?
> Right now, you have to use arcane L
Joe Schaefer said:
>> Something like an auth module that can do "form based" auth, in
>> addition to "basic" and "digest" etc would probably be very useful.
>
> apreq does that.
What is apreq?
Regards,
Graham
--
"Graham Leggett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> Something like an auth module that can do "form based" auth, in
> addition to "basic" and "digest" etc would probably be very useful.
apreq does that.
--
Joe Schaefer
Graham Leggett wrote:
Paul A Houle said:
I think of all the features that web site authors and developers
need that still don't exist in mainstream web servers; part of this
is in the area of "content management" and another major are is
authentication -- pretty much any serious interactiv
Paul A Houle said:
> I think of all the features that web site authors and developers
> need that still don't exist in mainstream web servers; part of this
> is in the area of "content management" and another major are is
> authentication -- pretty much any serious interactive web site need
But how many people really need 10,000+ concurrent connections?
Obviously CNN does. I'll make a bet Amazon does. Lets add ebay. Those are
power users.
The web site I manage does about 5 million hits per day (not including
graphics, style sheets, etc which are served by a different server), 80%
o
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
--On Monday, February 28, 2005 6:24 PM -0500 Jeffrey Burgoyne
I believe 255 concurrent clients is really low now-a-days for high-end
production servers.
It's when you start to get into several thousand concurrent connections
that I've found that the memory model of pr
Well the only module not distributed in apache2 distro is mod_jk
(another ASF module).
Well I'll try to upgrade my production systems with 2.0.53 and latest
mod_jk (1.2.9-dev).
Thanks Jeff
On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 05:57:39 -0500, Jeff Trawick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 10:04:03 +
> William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>> At 03:17 PM 2/28/2005, Paul A. Houle wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 21:09:55 +, Wayne S. Frazee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>wrote:
>
>> Oh boy - you don't know *what* you are missing :) Threads on
>> Linux barely differ from distinct processes, while on Solaris
>>
On Tue, Mar 01, 2005 at 12:02:11AM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> At 03:17 PM 2/28/2005, Paul A. Houle wrote:
> >On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 21:09:55 +, Wayne S. Frazee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >wrote:
> >
> >We've got production instances of Apache 2 running on Linux and Solaris,
> >all of whi
On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 10:04:03 +0100, Henri Gomez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Nobody to wonder about this bug ?
sure; note that you're using old code (2.0.49/2.0.49) which isn't
supported here anyway since we don't know what code is in it (SuSE)
> > It's seems the problem occurs will Apache receive
Paul Querna wrote:
>
> Laszlo wrote:
> > Hi all
> >
> > Have somebody used xerces-c in an apache2 module?
> > My files contain XML data and I want to handle
> > them with an Apache2 module.
> >
> > How is it possible?
>
> I only have personal experience on handling XML with libxml2 in apache
> mo
Nobody to wonder about this bug ?
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 10:45:36 +0100, Henri Gomez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi to all,
>
> Apache 2 (2.0.48/2.0.49) got problems at restart time (SIGUSR1) when
> rotating its log.
>
> [Thu Feb 24 04:15:11 2005] [notice] Apache/2.0.48 (Linux/SuSE)
> configured
32 matches
Mail list logo
