I've wondered for some time why mod_imap is turned on by default.
Perhaps it was for historical reasons. But it is also turned on by
default in 2.0, which seems odd, since it's pretty certain that nobody
has used this module since about 1996 when Netscape 2.0b1 came out with
client-side imagemap su
According to Rich Bowen:
[Remove mod_imap and mod_asis from the default list]
+1
ciao...
--
Lars Eilebrecht- All the simple programs have been
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - written, and all the good names taken.
On Sun, Mar 09, 2003 at 09:30:52PM +0100, Lars Eilebrecht wrote:
> According to Rich Bowen:
>
> [Remove mod_imap and mod_asis from the default list]
>
> +1
>
Looking back, I think I've used each module once, but only mod_asis
within the last 5 or 6 years - I suppose most everyone use them
even
On Sun, 9 Mar 2003, Lars Eilebrecht wrote:
> According to Rich Bowen:
>
> [Remove mod_imap and mod_asis from the default list]
>
> +1
Two comments:
1. This might be a good opportunity to go through the whole list and see
what should be in and out of a default build. For example, mod_expires
mi
--On Sunday, March 9, 2003 6:48 PM -0500 Joshua Slive <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
2. If we want to keep our contract with the user about the stable series
valid, this change should go into 2.1 only. Otherwise, users doing a
"configure; make; make install" or even a "config.status" could get a
nast
are we talking about removing modules entirely, or just modifying what's
enabled by default?
Dave
- Original Message -
From: "Justin Erenkrantz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2003 8:39 PM
Subject: Re: Proposal: Remove
* David Burry ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
> are we talking about removing modules entirely, or just modifying what's
> enabled by default?
>
Just what's enabled by default.
-Thom
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2003 8:39 PM
> Subject: Re: Proposal: Remove mod_imap from default list
>
>
> > --On Sunday, March 9, 2003 6:48 PM -0500 Joshua Slive <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > 2. If we want to keep our con
Rich Bowen wrote:
> The comment about mod_asis was probably
> unwarranted. I think that there are probably people that use mod_asis.
We did use mod_asis on daedalus not too long ago, but don't seem to at present.
I have no way of knowing how common it is. If we decide to not build it by
> 1. This might be a good opportunity to go through the whole list and see
> what should be in and out of a default build. For example, mod_expires
> might be a good addition. Of course, I don't have time to do this myself
> at the moment, so feel free to ignore this comment.
> 2. If we want to
On Mon, 10 Mar 2003, Greg Ames wrote:
> Rich Bowen wrote:
>
> > The comment about mod_asis was probably
> > unwarranted. I think that there are probably people that use mod_asis.
>
> We did use mod_asis on daedalus not too long ago, but don't seem to at
> present. I have no way of knowing h
* Astrid Keßler wrote:
agreed with the removings.
> And I would add:
>
> mod_logio and mod_expire
mod_logio... no. I think 'most' is a good (or say, better) place for it.
But I would consider mod_headers as a base module.
nd
--
Gib' mal folgendes in die Kommandozeile ein (und einen Moment
On Mon, 10 Mar 2003, Greg Ames wrote:
> Rich Bowen wrote:
>
> > The comment about mod_asis was probably
> > unwarranted. I think that there are probably people that use mod_asis.
>
> We did use mod_asis on daedalus not too long ago, but don't seem to at present.
> I have no way of know
On Mon, 10 Mar 2003, Astrid [ISO-8859-1] Keßler wrote:
> I suggest to remove from default:
>
> mod_userdir, mod_asis, mod_imap and mod_status
>
> I'm not sure about mod_userdir. It's used, yes, but it need not be
> default. I think of mod_userdir as an additional feature.
Based on IRC and maili
On Sun, 9 Mar 2003, Joshua Slive wrote:
> 1. This might be a good opportunity to go through the whole list and see
> what should be in and out of a default build. For example, mod_expires
> might be a good addition. Of course, I don't have time to do this myself
> at the moment, so feel free to
Astrid Keßler wrote:
I suggest to remove from default:
mod_userdir, mod_asis, mod_imap and mod_status
Most users don't know what to do with mod_asis or how to read
mod_status. The only active installation of mod_status I've ever seen,
has been at beginners first servers.
http://www.apache.org
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 09:58:58AM -0500, Greg Ames wrote:
> Astrid Ke?ler wrote:
>
> >I suggest to remove from default:
> >
> > mod_userdir, mod_asis, mod_imap and mod_status
>
> >Most users don't know what to do with mod_asis or how to read
> >mod_status. The only active installation of mod_st
On Tue, 11 Mar 2003, Rich Bowen wrote:
> > I suggest to remove from default:
> >
> > mod_userdir, mod_asis, mod_imap and mod_status
> >
> > I'm not sure about mod_userdir. It's used, yes, but it need not be
> > default. I think of mod_userdir as an additional feature.
>
> Based on IRC and mailin
On Tue, 11 Mar 2003, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2003, Rich Bowen wrote:
>
> > > I suggest to remove from default:
> > >
> > > mod_userdir, mod_asis, mod_imap and mod_status
> > >
> > > I'm not sure about mod_userdir. It's used, yes, but it need not be
> > > default. I think of mod_use
First, I'm talking about changes in 2.1 only. I'm opposed against
changing the module status in 1.3 or 2.0, too. :)
> In this discussion about default modules, I hear three different things:
> 1) compile a module by default (or what category, e.g "most" or "all")
> 2) enable a module in the
Astrid Keßler wrote:
I do think that mod_userdir, mod_asis, mod_imap, and mod_status should
_not_ be enabled by default in the configuration, although I see no
reason why the should not be built at compile time.
The point is: these modules are copiled statically (by default). I would
not compile
> On Mon, 10 Mar 2003, Greg Ames wrote:
>
> > Rich Bowen wrote:
> >
> > > The comment about mod_asis was probably
> > > unwarranted. I think that there are probably people that use mod_asis.
I myself have used it more than once, and I don't get
all that tricky with my code. It a
22 matches
Mail list logo
