John Peacock wrote:
Stas Bekman wrote:
John, so APR-0.9.x should be 0.009000 and not 0.90, right?
Definitely! Parse as (\d+)\.(\d{3})(\d*) and you will be consistent
with everything (the version.pm module splits on three digits like
that). The discussion "Improved Perl version numbering sys
Stas Bekman wrote:
John, so APR-0.9.x should be 0.009000 and not 0.90, right?
Definitely! Parse as (\d+)\.(\d{3})(\d*) and you will be consistent
with everything (the version.pm module splits on three digits like
that). The discussion "Improved Perl version numbering system" in
perl56delta
John, so APR-0.9.x should be 0.009000 and not 0.90, right?
--
__
Stas BekmanJAm_pH --> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://u
On Tue, 2005-01-04 at 14:09 -0500, Jeremy Redburn wrote:
> I've been looking for advice (perlmonks, p5p, colleagues) on maintaining
> a persistent pool of Perl interpreters, and all the advice seems to come
> back to mod_perl 2.
We're very tightly tied to Apache 2 for the processing model. If y
Thanks very much for your quick reply. I've got a similar set of
examples to your's below, but have been having trouble building the pool
required to keep track of the multiple interpreters.
After a brief look at modperl_interp.[ch] and modperl_types.h, it looks
like there are enough references
Jeremy Redburn wrote:
Hello,
I've been looking for advice (perlmonks, p5p, colleagues) on maintaining
a persistent pool of Perl interpreters, and all the advice seems to come
back to mod_perl 2. While I was hoping to find a simpler example, it
seems I will need to make my way through your codeba
Hello,
I've been looking for advice (perlmonks, p5p, colleagues) on maintaining
a persistent pool of Perl interpreters, and all the advice seems to come
back to mod_perl 2. While I was hoping to find a simpler example, it
seems I will need to make my way through your codebase.
I was hoping some
Philippe M. Chiasson wrote:
Stas Bekman wrote:
Randy Kobes wrote:
On Tue, 4 Jan 2005, Stas Bekman wrote:
As noted the PAUSE indexer can't index any of our
autogenerated files, since they aren't in the distro that
gets uploaded to CPAN. As we really need to get RC3 out
tomorrow, the following temp s
John Peacock wrote:
Stas Bekman wrote:
Stas Bekman wrote:
-our $VERSION = "1.9920";
+our $VERSION = "1.099020";
It doesn't seem that we can do that until we get to 2.0, since: 1.19
(the current mp1 version) > 1.099020 (the current mp2 version), so any
code doing this checking will break.
Stas Bekman wrote:
Randy Kobes wrote:
On Tue, 4 Jan 2005, Stas Bekman wrote:
As noted the PAUSE indexer can't index any of our
autogenerated files, since they aren't in the distro that
gets uploaded to CPAN. As we really need to get RC3 out
tomorrow, the following temp solution resolves this
proble
Stas Bekman wrote:
Stas Bekman wrote:
-our $VERSION = "1.9920";
+our $VERSION = "1.099020";
It doesn't seem that we can do that until we get to 2.0, since: 1.19
(the current mp1 version) > 1.099020 (the current mp2 version), so any
code doing this checking will break. (A-T breaks already
Stas Bekman wrote:
As noted the PAUSE indexer can't index any of our autogenerated files,
since they aren't in the distro that gets uploaded to CPAN. As we really
need to get RC3 out tomorrow, the following temp solution resolves this
problem, by autogenerating lib/ModPerl/DummyVersions.pm which
Stas Bekman wrote:
-our $VERSION = "1.9920";
+our $VERSION = "1.099020";
It doesn't seem that we can do that until we get to 2.0, since: 1.19 (the
current mp1 version) > 1.099020 (the current mp2 version), so any code
doing this checking will break. (A-T breaks already and the fix would b
Randy Kobes wrote:
On Tue, 4 Jan 2005, Stas Bekman wrote:
As noted the PAUSE indexer can't index any of our
autogenerated files, since they aren't in the distro that
gets uploaded to CPAN. As we really need to get RC3 out
tomorrow, the following temp solution resolves this
problem, by autogenerati
Stas Bekman wrote:
OK so to sum things up:
On our side:
in RC2 we move to:
$mod_perl::VERSION = 1.099_019;
which will eventually become:
$mod_perl::VERSION = 2.000_000;
we mangle Makefile.PL to convert x.yyy_zzz into x.y.z and pass it to:
WriteMakefile(VERSION => "x.y.z").
so the
Adam Kennedy wrote:
To this list:
I've been advised that in a situation like this it isn't wise to keep
emails off the list, so I'm bringing a private conversation back into
the list, since it has gone a lot further than I had expected.
Adam, what you just did is simple unacceptible. You took the
> And that's why Apache2_2 won't be necessary. If Apache2 becomes
> Apache3 because they rewrite everything from scratch again, then we
> release mp3 with Apache3:: prefixes!
unfortunately, I don't think that is entirely true. one of my Apache 2.x
modules, Apache::IncludeHook, is an XS wrapper
> "Joe" == Joe Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Joe> Yes, I think we would actually. Because moving from mp1
Joe> to mp2 always necessitated a webserver change, so you can't
Joe> simply mark it as a CPAN upgrade from mp1 and expect some
Joe> random mp1 app-server to be happy about the "up
Adam Kennedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> If you had kept mod_perl 2 completely compatible with mod_perl 1 you
> wouldn't need to use Apache2:: at all, and we wouldn't be in this
> situation.
Yes, I think we would actually. Because moving from mp1
to mp2 always necessitated a webserver
Adam Kennedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So does that mean it's NOT just in the platform
> configuration that we need the "use Apache2"?
The fact that it's now present in the apreq2's pod
tests (which are not Apache::Test based) is an
issue for us to consider. But overall I agree
with Geoff's
To the list:
Again, I've brought this back in, which wasn't meant to be private in
the first place, but was mis-sent.
I'll try to keep everything as transparent as possible in future.
Stas Bekman wrote:
Adam Kennedy wrote:
>> Putting aside for the moment the relationship of these to
>> their mp
To this list:
I've been advised that in a situation like this it isn't wise to keep
emails off the list, so I'm bringing a private conversation back into
the list, since it has gone a lot further than I had expected.
Stas Bekman wrote:
This is just a software. This is not real life. So making en
22 matches
Mail list logo
