apache+mozilla.org features

[Paul Phillips <pa...@go2net.com>]

I'm now the "blue sky guy" at mozilla.org, see

  http://www.mozilla.org/blue-sky/

I'm betting that some of you fine apache developers and lurkers have
good ideas about what we ought to be doing now that the mozilla source
will be running around, especially with regard to protocols, but you
name it.

Call me crazy but I think cooperation between apache folks and mozilla
folks is super key.

So, if you have "blue sky" ideas (and please note the little speech
about the <FOO> tag at the referenced URL, minor protocol tweaks fall
in the same category) that you'd like to see presented at mozilla.org
for public digestion, please bring them up on the mozilla-wishlist
mailing list (preferred) or here (not recommended unless it really has
to do with apache development) or email me directly (if you have some
good reason not to use mozilla-wishlist.) Info on the mozilla mailing
lists is at

  http://www.mozilla.org/community.html

Thanks.

-- 
Paul Phillips      | Complexity is more complex than we are.
Lord of Nothing    | 
<pa...@go2net.com> | 
+1 206 447 1595    |--------* http://www.go2net.com/people/paulp/ *--------

Re: apache+mozilla.org features

[Rob Hartill <ro...@imdb.com>]

On Mon, 23 Mar 1998, Paul Phillips wrote:

> I'm now the "blue sky guy" at mozilla.org, see
> 
>   http://www.mozilla.org/blue-sky/
> 
> I'm betting that some of you fine apache developers and lurkers have
> good ideas about what we ought to be doing now that the mozilla source
> will be running around, especially with regard to protocols, but you
> name it.
> 
> Call me crazy but I think cooperation between apache folks and mozilla
> folks is super key.
> 
> So, if you have "blue sky" ideas (and please note the little speech
> about the <FOO> tag at the referenced URL, minor protocol tweaks fall
> in the same category) that you'd like to see presented at mozilla.org
> for public digestion, please bring them up on the mozilla-wishlist
> mailing list (preferred) or here (not recommended unless it really has
> to do with apache development)

I don't have time for another list, but here's one suggestion..

Apache and other servers would probably be more efficient if Mozilla
didn't *insist* on wasting keepalive potential by blasting servers with
parallel requests. Ideally it needs a smarter algorithm for deciding
whether to wait slightly longer and reuse an open connection or try
to save time by opening more connections. If Mozilla could remember
that a server is willing to keepalive, then waiting that little bit
longer is less of a gamble.

--
Rob Hartill                              Internet Movie Database (Ltd)
http://www.moviedatabase.com/   .. a site for sore eyes.