trunk -> 2.2 proxy alignment

[Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>]

Some may recall many moons ago I took some time to try
to bring the proxy code changes (code as well as build)
from trunk back to 2.2 tree, to help make it easier to
backport fixes...

I'd like to float that idea again, before I spend any more
time on it...

Re: trunk -> 2.2 proxy alignment

[Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>]

On Aug 25, 2009, at 7:01 PM, Graham Leggett wrote:

> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>> Some may recall many moons ago I took some time to try
>> to bring the proxy code changes (code as well as build)
>> from trunk back to 2.2 tree, to help make it easier to
>> backport fixes...
>>
>> I'd like to float that idea again, before I spend any more
>> time on it...
>
> +1 in principal, but with the obvious caveat that the ABI needs to be
> maintained. Not sure which changes you had in mind?
>

Yes, maintaining API/ABI... I had a branch (https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/branches/httpd-2.2-proxy 
)
that I was using for this back-and-forth, but have let it lay
fallow for awhile.

I'll update it and we can use that as a discussion point :)

Re: trunk -> 2.2 proxy alignment

[Graham Leggett <mi...@sharp.fm>]

Jim Jagielski wrote:

> Some may recall many moons ago I took some time to try
> to bring the proxy code changes (code as well as build)
> from trunk back to 2.2 tree, to help make it easier to
> backport fixes...
> 
> I'd like to float that idea again, before I spend any more
> time on it...

+1 in principal, but with the obvious caveat that the ABI needs to be
maintained. Not sure which changes you had in mind?

Regards,
Graham
--

Re: trunk -> 2.2 proxy alignment

["William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>]

Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Some may recall many moons ago I took some time to try
> to bring the proxy code changes (code as well as build)
> from trunk back to 2.2 tree, to help make it easier to
> backport fixes...
> 
> I'd like to float that idea again, before I spend any more
> time on it...

The question is, really, what API changes do you want to bring
back.  Those within mod_proxy, httpd, or both?  The group's adopted
policy has been not to break compiled modules going forward on 2.2
(or 2.0, etc), so the question is where is that line?

The group agreed on the no-breaking changes policy, so if the group
agrees that this doesn't apply to API's within mod_proxy or any
third party modules compiled for mod_proxy, the group can do that.

But if folks don't agree that the policy should be suspended for
modules built against mod_proxy, then 2.4 is you answer, whether
this is trunk/ or a combination of httpd branch 2.2 + proxy trunk,
or whatever.

Re: trunk -> 2.2 proxy alignment

["Akins, Brian" <Br...@turner.com>]

On 8/25/09 8:47 AM, "Jim Jagielski" <ji...@jaguNET.com> wrote:

> I'd like to float that idea again, before I spend any more
> time on it...

+1

I've been, umm, struggling with some proxy stuff recently and it's annoying
that 2.2.x and trunk are so different.


One idea:

Can we replace the void *context in the workers with a per module config? As
is now, a single void * just seems dangerous.

-- 
Brian Akins