Mailing List Archive

Modules and distribution and stuff
Hmm.

With 1.0 coming up soon (right?), and new features soon, something we
might want to think about is the handling of modules, and what's included
in the Apache distribution. Currently, we have four 'sets' of modules:

a) basic modules, those that come with the server, and are in the first
batch in the Configuration file, uncommented and usually always installed.

b) "Modules which implement Apache extensions". The second batch of the
Configuration file. As of now, asis, imap and dbm.

c) The experimental stuff. This also comes with the server, but commented
out.

d) Modules in ftp.apache.org:/apache/dist/contrib/modules/. Don't come
with the server. Gee.

IMO, this needs some cleanup. I think we should get rid of b and c. For
one thing, the distinction between a and b seems very hazy to me. Why is
asis in b but content negotiation in a? They're both "Apache extensions",
content negotation much more so than asis files. It seems an artitrary
line to me. Besides, anyone who wouldn't want these features will
presumably also not want some of the others, and therefore needs to be
smart enough to realize that the line that says "cgi_module" controls CGI
and the one called "imap_module" controls imagemaps. Right?

As for c, I don't think outright experiments belong in the distribution
anyhow. Test them, make them work, they get voted on (three +1s to add a
new module, I'd imagine, just like any other patch), and if they like
them, they go in and are uncommented by default. Otherwise, they can be
rewritten and submitted again, put in contrib/modules, or just eaten by
the author.

Oh, and I'm still waiting for somebody to move one of my Action modules
(mod_actions.c probably) from /httpd/incoming to contrib/modules. *cough*.

--/ Alexei Kosut <akosut@nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us> /--------/ Lefler on IRC
----------------------------/ <http://www.nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us/~akosut/>
The viewpoints expressed above are entirely false, and in no way
represent Alexei Kosut nor any other person or entity. /--------------
Re: Modules and distribution and stuff [ In reply to ]
On Wed, 22 Nov 1995, Andrew Wilson wrote:

> [good stuff about modules snipped gratuitously]
> > Oh, and I'm still waiting for somebody to move one of my Action modules
> > (mod_actions.c probably) from /httpd/incoming to contrib/modules. *cough*.
>
> Done. What is the status of mod_action.c (no 's'), who owns that?

Thanks. mod_action.c is also mine, but it had been ponted out that it was
pretty much an inefficient way of doing it, so I respun it as
mod_actions. The prior one can be zapped if someone feels like it.

--/ Alexei Kosut <akosut@nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us> /--------/ Lefler on IRC
----------------------------/ <http://www.nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us/~akosut/>
The viewpoints expressed above are entirely false, and in no way
represent Alexei Kosut nor any other person or entity. /--------------
Re: Modules and distribution and stuff [ In reply to ]
[good stuff about modules snipped gratuitously]
> Oh, and I'm still waiting for somebody to move one of my Action modules
> (mod_actions.c probably) from /httpd/incoming to contrib/modules. *cough*.

Done. What is the status of mod_action.c (no 's'), who owns that?

Note that the modules in contrib all carry the old (pre 16) licence
headers. The issues are:

1) do modules 'bequeathed' (good word!) to Apache Group get their
licence headers updated whenever the main code gets changed?

2) do modules carrying their authors *own* licence headers (there
are none) get the licence scrubbed and the Apache one put in its
place (!).

+1 we (I) update the exiting contrib'd modules so that they carry the
.16 licence header.

As for (2) I dunno what's best, I'm inclined to think that contributed
stuff should be resubmitted with the new headers inserted by the authors
rather than have someone messing with their code (albeit comments) behind
their backs.

Comments?

> --/ Alexei Kosut <akosut@nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us> /--------/ Lefler on IRC

Cheers,
Ay.