On 04-05-2012 21:04, Igor Galić wrote:
>
>> [+1] Add commentary system to the trunk documentation.
>
>
> This may be worth a separate thread, but I'll just ask
> it here, before I forget about it:
>
> Any chance we'll see a backport of this to /current/ ?
> If so, will we display the same comm
On Friday 04 May 2012, Igor Galić wrote:
> - Original Message -
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > there are some parts of httpd where unit tests would allow easier
> > testing or more complete test coverage than tests written for the
> > perl
> > framework. Examples include the ap_pcfg_* functions, the v
> Of course it would also be a possibility that we simply mark the
> functions to be tested as non-static. Personally, I think that is
> ugly, though.
On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Eric Covener wrote:
>> Of course it would also be a possibility that we simply mark the
>> functions to be tested as non-static. Personally, I think that is
>> ugly, though.
Sorry, sent draft instead of discarding.
Could they have some AP_XXX macro that resulted i
- Original Message -
> On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Eric Covener
> wrote:
> >> Of course it would also be a possibility that we simply mark the
> >> functions to be tested as non-static. Personally, I think that is
> >> ugly, though.
>
> Sorry, sent draft instead of discarding.
>
> Co
Over on docs@ one of the recent conversations was
around moving the site documentation to the CMS,
starting first with the httpd site as a testbed.
After several hours of hacking on the site that
has now been accomplished, so we'd please like everyone
to review and comment on the httpd staging site
