Brian Mearns wrote:
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 11:15 AM, David Henderson
wrote:
I would vote to make it a module over a patch due to Brian Mearns making a
good point about it possibly not moving beyond the IEFT. At least a modular
design can just be dropped from the operation of the server wit
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 11:15 AM, David Henderson
wrote:
> I would vote to make it a module over a patch due to Brian Mearns making a
> good point about it possibly not moving beyond the IEFT. At least a modular
> design can just be dropped from the operation of the server without having
> to rem
I would vote to make it a module over a patch due to Brian Mearns making
a good point about it possibly not moving beyond the IEFT. At least a
modular design can just be dropped from the operation of the server
without having to remove code from the core of the project (and network
admins havi
Mike Cardwell wrote:
Does Apache intend to add support for Googles recently announced SPDY
protocol?
http://sites.google.com/a/chromium.org/dev/spdy/spdy-whitepaper
Patches welcome! Or in this case, maybe a module.
--
Nick Kew
---
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 9:51 AM, Mike Cardwell
wrote:
> Does Apache intend to add support for Googles recently announced SPDY
> protocol?
>
> http://sites.google.com/a/chromium.org/dev/spdy/spdy-whitepaper
>
> --
> Mike Cardwell - IT Consultant and LAMP developer
> Cardwell IT Ltd. (UK Reg'd Compa
After investigating this protocol, I agree that this would make a fine
addition to the worlds greatest web server!
Mike Cardwell wrote:
Does Apache intend to add support for Googles recently announced SPDY
protocol?
http://sites.google.com/a/chromium.org/dev/spdy/spdy-whitepaper
-
Does Apache intend to add support for Googles recently announced SPDY
protocol?
http://sites.google.com/a/chromium.org/dev/spdy/spdy-whitepaper
--
Mike Cardwell - IT Consultant and LAMP developer
Cardwell IT Ltd. (UK Reg'd Company #06920226) http://cardwellit.com/
Technical Blog: https://secure
