You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@ebuilt.com> on 2000/12/04 19:19:48 UTC
httpd-2.0 module is up
The httpd-2.0 module is ready to be checked-out and extended.
I have completed the copy of existing RCS files over to the new
directory structure, but some of the readme and non-history-sensitive
files are awaiting a scrubbing before being added as new files.
All of the Attic directories were excluded, since old versions
will still be available from the apache-2.0 module. The tags
should be left as is, since they are still useful for file diffs.
None of the build files have been changed yet (only moved)
and some of the new directories need new Makefile.in/config.m4
files. I figured it was better to only replicate the minimal
structure and let the rest be grown in place.
The docs subtree is also the new httpd-docs-2.0 module.
The srclib/apr and srclib/apr-util directories will have to be
checked-out separately, according to whether you want read-only
or writable access to those projects. I considered doing the same
for pcre, expat-lite, and sdbm, but decided that it wasn't worth
the hassle.
Ryan, I didn't change MM at all because it is within the apr module.
I figured breaking one module was enough for one night.
I decided to put the protocol modules directly under modules,
based on the theory that someone might only want to use the
server process and config framework. The primary HTTP files
are under http/modules, but they probably need to be dissected
into more composable bits. You will note that I renamed the
other http_*.c files to be more agnostic, but those too will
require some dissecting to make the content protocol-independent.
I tagged the old module with "moving_to_httpd_module" before I
did the copies, so we can use that to pick up changes after the
copy and repeat them on httpd. Unfortunately, that means all of
Jeff Trawick's changes this morning.
I restored all of the CHANGES from Apache 1.3.9 and earlier, since
they are still the primary way we recognize contributions (and
some people complained bout their absence).
I'm too tired to code, but will continue to add the top-level
documentation files as the day continues (been up 22 hrs so far).
Go at it,
....Roy
Re: httpd-2.0 module is up
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@ebuilt.com>.
> hmmm... modules/aaa seems a little mysterious to me (but I didn't
> follow the restructuring discussion very closely :) )
Sorry -- it is standard IETF parlance for Access Authentication and
Authorization. I will be adding a README to the modules directory.
> apr didn't checkout automatically...
Due to the difference in developer groups, it will need to be
checked-out independently. The same is true of apr-util and
(eventually) other libraries that we use but don't maintain.
> Do we know if we have the cvs mailing list working yet?
Yes -- I made sure of that before posting.
> anoncvs checkout seems to be going okay at the moment. I created the
> magic symbolic link in /home/cvspublic.
Thanks, I forgot to enable that. The link to httpd-docs-2.0 was
pointing to the wrong place, but I've fixed that now.
....Roy
Re: httpd-2.0 module is up
Posted by Jeff Trawick <tr...@bellsouth.net>.
"Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@ebuilt.com> writes:
> I tagged the old module with "moving_to_httpd_module" before I
> did the copies, so we can use that to pick up changes after the
> copy and repeat them on httpd. Unfortunately, that means all of
> Jeff Trawick's changes this morning.
I'll work on getting my apache changes from this a.m. up-to-date
now...
hmmm... modules/aaa seems a little mysterious to me (but I didn't
follow the restructuring discussion very closely :) )
apr didn't checkout automatically...
Do we know if we have the cvs mailing list working yet?
anoncvs checkout seems to be going okay at the moment. I created the
magic symbolic link in /home/cvspublic.
--
Jeff Trawick | trawickj@bellsouth.net | PGP public key at web site:
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Park/9289/
Born in Roswell... married an alien...
Re: httpd-2.0 module is up
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org>.
On Mon, Dec 04, 2000 at 06:58:54PM -0800, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> Argh. I took a nap and woke up four hours later. When I did,
> I realized that I forgot to mention the most important thing --
> I want everyone to look at the repository and see if the new layout
> is good or if it sucks. If it sucks, I'd like to fix it now before too
> much is invested in the work.
Seems fine. We aren't really going to know until we get a bit of exercise
with it, and that isn't going to happen unless we cold-turkey switch over.
> One thing I know I screwed up was in moving the three main http
> files over to modules/http -- I should have left them in server
> (what was src/main) to make the build easier. I am fixing that now.
> Ryan, let me know if I am getting in your way.
As Ryan said... these should go ahead and stay in their new location for
now. We can munge them up in their new place (and kludge things a bit until
then).
> The other thing I didn't mention is that I did not change the
> avail line for apache-2.0, since I wasn't sure if we wanted to
> adopt this new repository right away or if was going to be kicked
> back at me for improvements. *shrug*
Ryan zapped the avail line earlier today. For all intents and purposes,
apache-2.0 is dead, and we're now working on httpd-2.0.
Cheers,
-g
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Re: httpd-2.0 module is up
Posted by rb...@covalent.net.
> The other thing I didn't mention is that I did not change the
> avail line for apache-2.0, since I wasn't sure if we wanted to
> adopt this new repository right away or if was going to be kicked
> back at me for improvements. *shrug*
I thought we had made that decision already, when you posted the
plan. Regardless, rather than have to deal with multiple repositories all
referencing the same files, we have a single repository that is VERY close
to working now.
Ryan
_______________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: httpd-2.0 module is up
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@ebuilt.com>.
Argh. I took a nap and woke up four hours later. When I did,
I realized that I forgot to mention the most important thing --
I want everyone to look at the repository and see if the new layout
is good or if it sucks. If it sucks, I'd like to fix it now before too
much is invested in the work.
One thing I know I screwed up was in moving the three main http
files over to modules/http -- I should have left them in server
(what was src/main) to make the build easier. I am fixing that now.
Ryan, let me know if I am getting in your way.
The other thing I didn't mention is that I did not change the
avail line for apache-2.0, since I wasn't sure if we wanted to
adopt this new repository right away or if was going to be kicked
back at me for improvements. *shrug*
....Roy
Re: httpd-2.0 module is up
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org>.
That should be a simple matter of adjusting the "avail" file, which you have
the proper karma to do.
Cheers,
-g
On Mon, Dec 04, 2000 at 10:28:32AM -0800, rbb@covalent.net wrote:
>
> Is there a chance that we can disallow commits to apache-2.0 now? I don't
> want to have the problem that people will be committing to apache-2.0 and
> those changes won't get moved over.
>
> Ryan
>
> On Mon, 4 Dec 2000, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>
> > The httpd-2.0 module is ready to be checked-out and extended.
> >
> > I have completed the copy of existing RCS files over to the new
> > directory structure, but some of the readme and non-history-sensitive
> > files are awaiting a scrubbing before being added as new files.
> > All of the Attic directories were excluded, since old versions
> > will still be available from the apache-2.0 module. The tags
> > should be left as is, since they are still useful for file diffs.
> >
> > None of the build files have been changed yet (only moved)
> > and some of the new directories need new Makefile.in/config.m4
> > files. I figured it was better to only replicate the minimal
> > structure and let the rest be grown in place.
> >
> > The docs subtree is also the new httpd-docs-2.0 module.
> >
> > The srclib/apr and srclib/apr-util directories will have to be
> > checked-out separately, according to whether you want read-only
> > or writable access to those projects. I considered doing the same
> > for pcre, expat-lite, and sdbm, but decided that it wasn't worth
> > the hassle.
> >
> > Ryan, I didn't change MM at all because it is within the apr module.
> > I figured breaking one module was enough for one night.
> >
> > I decided to put the protocol modules directly under modules,
> > based on the theory that someone might only want to use the
> > server process and config framework. The primary HTTP files
> > are under http/modules, but they probably need to be dissected
> > into more composable bits. You will note that I renamed the
> > other http_*.c files to be more agnostic, but those too will
> > require some dissecting to make the content protocol-independent.
> >
> > I tagged the old module with "moving_to_httpd_module" before I
> > did the copies, so we can use that to pick up changes after the
> > copy and repeat them on httpd. Unfortunately, that means all of
> > Jeff Trawick's changes this morning.
> >
> > I restored all of the CHANGES from Apache 1.3.9 and earlier, since
> > they are still the primary way we recognize contributions (and
> > some people complained bout their absence).
> >
> > I'm too tired to code, but will continue to add the top-level
> > documentation files as the day continues (been up 22 hrs so far).
> >
> > Go at it,
> >
> > ....Roy
> >
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________________
> Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
> 406 29th St.
> San Francisco, CA 94131
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Plea (was Re: httpd-2.0 module is up)
Posted by Joe Orton <jo...@light.plus.com>.
On Mon, Dec 04, 2000 at 03:04:09PM -0800, Sander van Zoest wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Dec 2000, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>
> > The httpd-2.0 module is ready to be checked-out and extended.
>
> Can we add httpd-2.0-cvs to rsync?
>
> % rsync -avz dev.apache.org::httpd-2.0-cvs /work/cvs/root/asf/httpd/httpd-2.0
>
> @ERROR: Unknown module 'httpd-2.0-cvs'
> *** Error code 12
Any chance someone could do this?
joe
Re: httpd-2.0 module is up
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@ebuilt.com>.
> Can we add httpd-2.0-cvs to rsync?
>
> % rsync -avz dev.apache.org::httpd-2.0-cvs /work/cvs/root/asf/httpd/httpd-2.0
>
> @ERROR: Unknown module 'httpd-2.0-cvs'
> *** Error code 12
Someone with root access will need to add it to /usr/local/etc/rsyncd.conf
The entry for httpd-docs-2.0 also needs to be updated (or removed).
....Roy
Re: httpd-2.0 module is up
Posted by rb...@covalent.net.
If nobody vetos this in the next hour, I'll do that then.
Ryan
On Mon, 4 Dec 2000, Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Dec 2000 rbb@covalent.net wrote:
>
> > Is there a chance that we can disallow commits to apache-2.0 now? I don't
> > want to have the problem that people will be committing to apache-2.0 and
> > those changes won't get moved over.
>
> that's a good idea. Could be done easily by changing CVSROOT/avail
> to not give karma to anyone for apache-2.0.
>
>
> - ask
>
> --
> ask bjoern hansen - <http://ask.netcetera.dk/>
> more than 70M impressions per day, <http://valueclick.com>
>
>
_______________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: httpd-2.0 module is up
Posted by Ask Bjoern Hansen <as...@valueclick.com>.
On Mon, 4 Dec 2000 rbb@covalent.net wrote:
> Is there a chance that we can disallow commits to apache-2.0 now? I don't
> want to have the problem that people will be committing to apache-2.0 and
> those changes won't get moved over.
that's a good idea. Could be done easily by changing CVSROOT/avail
to not give karma to anyone for apache-2.0.
- ask
--
ask bjoern hansen - <http://ask.netcetera.dk/>
more than 70M impressions per day, <http://valueclick.com>
Re: httpd-2.0 module is up
Posted by rb...@covalent.net.
Is there a chance that we can disallow commits to apache-2.0 now? I don't
want to have the problem that people will be committing to apache-2.0 and
those changes won't get moved over.
Ryan
On Mon, 4 Dec 2000, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> The httpd-2.0 module is ready to be checked-out and extended.
>
> I have completed the copy of existing RCS files over to the new
> directory structure, but some of the readme and non-history-sensitive
> files are awaiting a scrubbing before being added as new files.
> All of the Attic directories were excluded, since old versions
> will still be available from the apache-2.0 module. The tags
> should be left as is, since they are still useful for file diffs.
>
> None of the build files have been changed yet (only moved)
> and some of the new directories need new Makefile.in/config.m4
> files. I figured it was better to only replicate the minimal
> structure and let the rest be grown in place.
>
> The docs subtree is also the new httpd-docs-2.0 module.
>
> The srclib/apr and srclib/apr-util directories will have to be
> checked-out separately, according to whether you want read-only
> or writable access to those projects. I considered doing the same
> for pcre, expat-lite, and sdbm, but decided that it wasn't worth
> the hassle.
>
> Ryan, I didn't change MM at all because it is within the apr module.
> I figured breaking one module was enough for one night.
>
> I decided to put the protocol modules directly under modules,
> based on the theory that someone might only want to use the
> server process and config framework. The primary HTTP files
> are under http/modules, but they probably need to be dissected
> into more composable bits. You will note that I renamed the
> other http_*.c files to be more agnostic, but those too will
> require some dissecting to make the content protocol-independent.
>
> I tagged the old module with "moving_to_httpd_module" before I
> did the copies, so we can use that to pick up changes after the
> copy and repeat them on httpd. Unfortunately, that means all of
> Jeff Trawick's changes this morning.
>
> I restored all of the CHANGES from Apache 1.3.9 and earlier, since
> they are still the primary way we recognize contributions (and
> some people complained bout their absence).
>
> I'm too tired to code, but will continue to add the top-level
> documentation files as the day continues (been up 22 hrs so far).
>
> Go at it,
>
> ....Roy
>
>
_______________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: httpd-2.0 module is up
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org>.
On Mon, Dec 04, 2000 at 07:35:40PM -0800, rbb@covalent.net wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Dec 2000, Greg Stein wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 04, 2000 at 07:23:32PM -0800, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> > > > It will *not* take us long to populate apr-util. The build structure is
> > > > already there. We just need to copy over the ,v files and nuke their tags.
> > >
> > > Don't nuke any tags
> >
> > We can do this...
> >
> > > -- they are needed for reference back to the
> > > other repository.
> >
> > But I don't understand this part.
> >
> > Could you explain a bit? I'm not sure how the old tags will help us, when
> > they're on files in the new apr-util directory tree...
>
> Just a note. I haven't yet, and don't plan to, nuke any tags. The files
> were moved, except for the apu_dmb.c files (this only affects DAV and the
> test dir, and I want a working server. Greg, feel free). After we have
> decided if we are going to nuke the tags, I will take care of this.
No problem. I'll get the files moved (and renamed) later tonite. I've got
some stuff to do this evening, then a friend is arriving late tonite. After
everybody goes to bed (and I'm still awake :-), I'll take care of apu_dbm.
[ and yah: we can certainly wait on the tags; it doesn't truly hurt to have
them still there (but can be confusing to somebody pulling an old
version), but I'm curious about Roy's comment... ]
thx,
-g
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Re: httpd-2.0 module is up
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@ebuilt.com>.
> Could you explain a bit? I'm not sure how the old tags will help us, when
> they're on files in the new apr-util directory tree...
I use tags when I am trying to find an error that shows up between
released versions. I don't want to have to check out the old repository
just to find out what revision number within a file corresponds to
that release.
It doesn't hurt to keep them, provided that we remember they can't
be used to regenerate the release as a whole.
....Roy
Re: httpd-2.0 module is up
Posted by rb...@covalent.net.
On Mon, 4 Dec 2000, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 04, 2000 at 07:23:32PM -0800, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> > > It will *not* take us long to populate apr-util. The build structure is
> > > already there. We just need to copy over the ,v files and nuke their tags.
> >
> > Don't nuke any tags
>
> We can do this...
>
> > -- they are needed for reference back to the
> > other repository.
>
> But I don't understand this part.
>
> Could you explain a bit? I'm not sure how the old tags will help us, when
> they're on files in the new apr-util directory tree...
Just a note. I haven't yet, and don't plan to, nuke any tags. The files
were moved, except for the apu_dmb.c files (this only affects DAV and the
test dir, and I want a working server. Greg, feel free). After we have
decided if we are going to nuke the tags, I will take care of this.
Ryan
_______________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: httpd-2.0 module is up
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org>.
On Mon, Dec 04, 2000 at 07:23:32PM -0800, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> > It will *not* take us long to populate apr-util. The build structure is
> > already there. We just need to copy over the ,v files and nuke their tags.
>
> Don't nuke any tags
We can do this...
> -- they are needed for reference back to the
> other repository.
But I don't understand this part.
Could you explain a bit? I'm not sure how the old tags will help us, when
they're on files in the new apr-util directory tree...
Thx,
-g
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Re: httpd-2.0 module is up
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@ebuilt.com>.
> It will *not* take us long to populate apr-util. The build structure is
> already there. We just need to copy over the ,v files and nuke their tags.
Don't nuke any tags -- they are needed for reference back to the
other repository. It doesn't matter that a tag-specified checkout
doesn't look like the original tagged distribution -- people who
need that should get it from the original repository.
....Roy
Re: httpd-2.0 module is up
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org>.
On Mon, Dec 04, 2000 at 03:10:08PM -0800, rbb@covalent.net wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Dec 2000, Sander van Zoest wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 4 Dec 2000, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> >
> > > The httpd-2.0 module is ready to be checked-out and extended.
> >
> > Can we add httpd-2.0-cvs to rsync?
> >
> > % rsync -avz dev.apache.org::httpd-2.0-cvs /work/cvs/root/asf/httpd/httpd-2.0
> >
> > @ERROR: Unknown module 'httpd-2.0-cvs'
> > *** Error code 12
>
> Can we wait until the thing builds please? I am fighting the code right
> now, and it is likely that this won't build for a while. I am close to
> putting commit access back in apache-2.0, because httpd-2.0 won't work
> until apr-util is created and populated.
I think the only missing item is apu_dbm ... or did src/ap/ get dropped,
too?
It will *not* take us long to populate apr-util. The build structure is
already there. We just need to copy over the ,v files and nuke their tags.
Please do not reenable apache-2.0 access. That will only exacerbate the
problem.
Cheers,
-g
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Re: httpd-2.0 module is up
Posted by rb...@covalent.net.
On Mon, 4 Dec 2000, Sander van Zoest wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Dec 2000, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>
> > The httpd-2.0 module is ready to be checked-out and extended.
>
> Can we add httpd-2.0-cvs to rsync?
>
> % rsync -avz dev.apache.org::httpd-2.0-cvs /work/cvs/root/asf/httpd/httpd-2.0
>
> @ERROR: Unknown module 'httpd-2.0-cvs'
> *** Error code 12
Can we wait until the thing builds please? I am fighting the code right
now, and it is likely that this won't build for a while. I am close to
putting commit access back in apache-2.0, because httpd-2.0 won't work
until apr-util is created and populated.
Ryan
_______________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: httpd-2.0 module is up
Posted by Sander van Zoest <sa...@covalent.net>.
On Mon, 4 Dec 2000, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> The httpd-2.0 module is ready to be checked-out and extended.
Can we add httpd-2.0-cvs to rsync?
% rsync -avz dev.apache.org::httpd-2.0-cvs /work/cvs/root/asf/httpd/httpd-2.0
@ERROR: Unknown module 'httpd-2.0-cvs'
*** Error code 12
Cheers,
--
Sander van Zoest [sander@covalent.net]
Covalent Technologies, Inc. http://www.covalent.net/
(415) 536-5218 http://www.vanzoest.com/sander/