You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@perl.apache.org by Geoffrey Young <ge...@modperlcookbook.org> on 2005/03/08 16:33:08 UTC
Re: svn commit: r156503 - in perl/modperl/branches/apache2-rename-unstable/t:
apache/ apache2/ conf/ filter/TestFilter/ htdocs/vhost/ response/TestAPI/
response/TestApache/ response/TestApache2/ response/TestCompat/ response/TestDirective/
response/TestError/ response/TestModperl/ response/TestModules/ response/TestVhost/
vhost/
joes@apache.org wrote:
> Author: joes
> Date: Mon Mar 7 21:16:47 2005
> New Revision: 156503
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=156503
> Log:
> Move t/apache to t/apache2. Include temporary
> workaround for CGI.pm's use of original Apache:: API.
actually, t/apache was supposed to represent exercises of the apache API
that wasn't really mod_perl specific but that should warn us when something
on the API level has changed that might affect users. see, for example,
t/apache/content_length_handler.t
so, I'm not so sure that the move to t/apache2 is warranted.
some other thoughts I've had
- Apache2::OK seems odd.
- ditto with Apache2->server.
in both these cases Apache.pm is a virtual package with no corresponding
real file, so I'm not sure that we need to use Apache2. except that it
would be consistent with all the other Apache2 foo. but Apache2::OK seems
really, really strange to me.
in general, as we moved away from using the Apache:: namespace at all (like
favoring Apache::ServerUtil::server_root_relative) it has been unclear on
what to do with things like the above.
so, thoughts at this point? anyone :)
--Geoff
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: svn commit: r156503 - in perl/modperl/branches/apache2-rename-unstable/t:
apache/ apache2/ conf/ filter/TestFilter/ htdocs/vhost/ response/TestAPI/
response/TestApache/ response/TestApache2/ respo
Posted by Randy Kobes <ra...@theoryx5.uwinnipeg.ca>.
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005, Geoffrey Young wrote:
> some other thoughts I've had
>
> - Apache2::OK seems odd.
>
> - ditto with Apache2->server.
>
> in both these cases Apache.pm is a virtual package with no
> corresponding real file, so I'm not sure that we need to
> use Apache2. except that it would be consistent with all
> the other Apache2 foo. but Apache2::OK seems really,
> really strange to me.
>
> in general, as we moved away from using the Apache::
> namespace at all (like favoring
> Apache::ServerUtil::server_root_relative) it has been
> unclear on what to do with things like the above.
>
> so, thoughts at this point? anyone :)
Apache2::OK seems a bit strange to me as well. However, I
like the clean separation of the mp2 Apache2::* stuff from
the mp1/Apache-Test Apache::* stuff; I think it will make
migration easier.
--
best regards,
randy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: svn commit: r156503 -
in perl/modperl/branches/apache2-rename-unstable/t: apache/ apache2/
conf/ filter/TestFilter/ htdocs/vhost/ response/TestAPI/
response/TestApache/ response/TestApache2/ response/TestCompat/
response/TestDirective/ response/TestError/ response/TestModperl/
response/TestModules/ response/TestVhost/ vhost/
Posted by Perrin Harkins <pe...@elem.com>.
On Tue, 2005-03-08 at 13:44 -0500, Geoffrey Young wrote:
> personally, Apache2::Const::OK may be more consistent but seems like quite a
> lot to type.
I always prefer more typing over confusing magic. My reservation would
be existing code, but I guess people have to change that anyway.
- Perrin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: svn commit: r156503 - in perl/modperl/branches/apache2-rename-unstable/t:
apache/ apache2/ conf/ filter/TestFilter/ htdocs/vhost/ response/TestAPI/
response/TestApache/ response/TestApache2/ response/TestCompat/ response/TestDirective/
response/TestError/ response/TestModperl/ response/TestModules/ response/TestVhost/
vhost/
Posted by Geoffrey Young <ge...@modperlcookbook.org>.
Perrin Harkins wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-03-08 at 10:33 -0500, Geoffrey Young wrote:
>
>>some other thoughts I've had
>>
>> - Apache2::OK seems odd.
>>
>> - ditto with Apache2->server.
>>
>>in both these cases Apache.pm is a virtual package with no corresponding
>>real file, so I'm not sure that we need to use Apache2. except that it
>>would be consistent with all the other Apache2 foo. but Apache2::OK seems
>>really, really strange to me.
>
>
> It doesn't seem strange to me. This is Apache2, and OK is a constant it
> provides.
ok.
>
> Dumb question: Why isn't it Apache2::Const::OK?
hmm...
well, I think it evolved somewhat like this...
in mp1 we had OK, but it was the same symbol duplicated in each package
which is wasteful
mp2 reduced the waste by precompiling constants into a single namespace
(leaving the old OK as an option, though). Apache:: probably seemed as good
as anything since it was both short and had precident - at the time we had
quite a few other things in the Apache:: namespace.
currently in mp2 we've shifted away from Apache:: as a namespace, in favor
of things living in real packages. the exceptions to this are the constants
and a handful of class methods like Apache->request and Apache->server.
with the migration away from Apache:: we didn't know exactly what do to with
these outliers, so we left them as is.
anyway, that's what I can recall off the top of my head.
personally, Apache2::Const::OK may be more consistent but seems like quite a
lot to type. so, I think I'm ok with just keeping Apache2::OK over making
it longer, but I don't feel strongly about it.
?
--Geoff
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: svn commit: r156503 - in
perl/modperl/branches/apache2-rename-unstable/t: apache/ apache2/ conf/
filter/TestFilter/ htdocs/vhost/ response/TestAPI/ response/TestApache/
response/TestApache2/ response/TestCompat/ response/TestDirective/
response/TestError/ response/TestModperl/ response/TestModules/
response/TestVhost/ vhost/
Posted by Perrin Harkins <pe...@elem.com>.
On Tue, 2005-03-08 at 10:33 -0500, Geoffrey Young wrote:
> some other thoughts I've had
>
> - Apache2::OK seems odd.
>
> - ditto with Apache2->server.
>
> in both these cases Apache.pm is a virtual package with no corresponding
> real file, so I'm not sure that we need to use Apache2. except that it
> would be consistent with all the other Apache2 foo. but Apache2::OK seems
> really, really strange to me.
It doesn't seem strange to me. This is Apache2, and OK is a constant it
provides.
Dumb question: Why isn't it Apache2::Const::OK?
- Perrin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org