You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com> on 2003/03/09 17:59:24 UTC
Proposal: Remove mod_imap from default list
I've wondered for some time why mod_imap is turned on by default.
Perhaps it was for historical reasons. But it is also turned on by
default in 2.0, which seems odd, since it's pretty certain that nobody
has used this module since about 1996 when Netscape 2.0b1 came out with
client-side imagemap support.
I was wondering what the procedure is for removing a module from the
default-on list (ie, the political procedure, not the technical one) and
if there was any real feeling that this should still be in there, or if
it is purely for historical reasons.
The Smart Sysadmins Principle (or something like that) says that you
should not be running services (or modules) that you are not actually
using. But almost every Apache installation on the planet is running
this module, although I would suspect that the vast majority of those
running it have no idea what it is for, and have never used it.
So, anyways, I'd really like to see it dropped from the "on by default"
list, in both 1.3 and 2.0.
I have similar feelings about mod_asis, but less strongly.
--
Pilgrim, how you journey on the road you chose
To find out where the winds die and where the stories go
--Pilgrim (Enya - A Day Without Rain)
Re: Proposal: Remove mod_imap from default list
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
On Tue, 11 Mar 2003, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2003, Rich Bowen wrote:
>
> > > I suggest to remove from default:
> > >
> > > mod_userdir, mod_asis, mod_imap and mod_status
> > >
> > > I'm not sure about mod_userdir. It's used, yes, but it need not be
> > > default. I think of mod_userdir as an additional feature.
> >
> > Based on IRC and mailing list traffic, I think that people would be very
> > astonished if mod_userdir was not part of a new installation.
>
> Absolutely they would. And frankly I'm strongly opposed to removing any
> module, even mod_imap or mod_asis, from the default on 1.3 or 2.0 because
> we've now well-established what the default is. Principle of least
> astonishment. A configuration that worked in 1.3.27 should work in
> 1.3.28, and likewise for 2.0.x. If you want to remove things, do it in
> 2.1, but not before.
Yeah, I think that that's probably best. I agree, grudgingly, that this
should be about 2.1 only.
--
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com
As we trace our own few circles around the sun
We get it backwards and our seven years go by like one
Dog Years (Rush - Test for Echo - 1999)
Re: Proposal: Remove mod_imap from default list
Posted by Cliff Woolley <jw...@virginia.edu>.
On Tue, 11 Mar 2003, Rich Bowen wrote:
> > I suggest to remove from default:
> >
> > mod_userdir, mod_asis, mod_imap and mod_status
> >
> > I'm not sure about mod_userdir. It's used, yes, but it need not be
> > default. I think of mod_userdir as an additional feature.
>
> Based on IRC and mailing list traffic, I think that people would be very
> astonished if mod_userdir was not part of a new installation.
Absolutely they would. And frankly I'm strongly opposed to removing any
module, even mod_imap or mod_asis, from the default on 1.3 or 2.0 because
we've now well-established what the default is. Principle of least
astonishment. A configuration that worked in 1.3.27 should work in
1.3.28, and likewise for 2.0.x. If you want to remove things, do it in
2.1, but not before.
--Cliff
Re: Proposal: Remove mod_imap from default list
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
On Mon, 10 Mar 2003, Astrid [ISO-8859-1] Ke�ler wrote:
> I suggest to remove from default:
>
> mod_userdir, mod_asis, mod_imap and mod_status
>
> I'm not sure about mod_userdir. It's used, yes, but it need not be
> default. I think of mod_userdir as an additional feature.
Based on IRC and mailing list traffic, I think that people would be very
astonished if mod_userdir was not part of a new installation.
--
Oh I have slipped the surly bonds of earth
And danced the sky on laughter-silvered wings
--High Flight (John Gillespie Magee)
Re: Proposal: Remove mod_imap from default list
Posted by Greg Ames <gr...@apache.org>.
Astrid Keßler wrote:
>>I do think that mod_userdir, mod_asis, mod_imap, and mod_status should
>>_not_ be enabled by default in the configuration, although I see no
>>reason why the should not be built at compile time.
>
>
> The point is: these modules are copiled statically (by default). I would
> not compile modules to be static, if they are not active by default.
dang, you're right! I thought that we were doing shared builds by default. But
I just tried it and got a static build with what looks like the "most" list
enabled. Maybe I was thinking of 1.3 and/or binbuild.
For some reason I thought we switched to shared builds by default on 2.0 several
web years ago on platforms where it works. Why can't we do that?
Greg
Re: Proposal: Remove mod_imap from default list
Posted by Astrid Keßler <ke...@kess-net.de>.
First, I'm talking about changes in 2.1 only. I'm opposed against
changing the module status in 1.3 or 2.0, too. :)
> In this discussion about default modules, I hear three different things:
> 1) compile a module by default (or what category, e.g "most" or "all")
> 2) enable a module in the httpd.conf configuration
> 3) remove a module from the tree
> I don't think anyone means to remove the modules from Apache entirely.
Ah, thank you Glenn for clarifying this. You are absolutely right. Point
1 is, what I'm talking about.
> I do think that mod_userdir, mod_asis, mod_imap, and mod_status should
> _not_ be enabled by default in the configuration, although I see no
> reason why the should not be built at compile time.
The point is: these modules are copiled statically (by default). I would
not compile modules to be static, if they are not active by default.
Kess
E-Mail: kess@kess-net.de
Re: Proposal: Remove mod_imap from default list
Posted by Glenn <gs...@gluelogic.com>.
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 09:58:58AM -0500, Greg Ames wrote:
> Astrid Ke?ler wrote:
>
> >I suggest to remove from default:
> >
> > mod_userdir, mod_asis, mod_imap and mod_status
>
> >Most users don't know what to do with mod_asis or how to read
> >mod_status. The only active installation of mod_status I've ever seen,
> >has been at beginners first servers.
>
> http://www.apache.org/server-status
>
> I'd prefer to keep mod_status as a default. It's a good
> debugging/monitoring tool. Sure, there may be many users who don't know
> how to read it at first. But if they have problems and call for support,
> having it pre-built can lead to shorter problem resolution time.
In this discussion about default modules, I hear three different things:
1) compile a module by default (or what category, e.g "most" or "all")
2) enable a module in the httpd.conf configuration
3) remove a module from the tree
I don't think anyone means to remove the modules from Apache entirely.
I do think that mod_userdir, mod_asis, mod_imap, and mod_status should
_not_ be enabled by default in the configuration, although I see no
reason why the should not be built at compile time. This way, they can
be enabled by uncommenting the appropriate lines in the httpd.conf, but
admins aren't running stuff unless they need it.
Is there a way to separate what gets compiled from what gets enabled in
the httpd.conf?
Cheers,
Glenn
Re: Proposal: Remove mod_imap from default list
Posted by Greg Ames <gr...@apache.org>.
Astrid Keßler wrote:
> I suggest to remove from default:
>
> mod_userdir, mod_asis, mod_imap and mod_status
> Most users don't know what to do with mod_asis or how to read
> mod_status. The only active installation of mod_status I've ever seen,
> has been at beginners first servers.
http://www.apache.org/server-status
I'd prefer to keep mod_status as a default. It's a good debugging/monitoring
tool. Sure, there may be many users who don't know how to read it at first.
But if they have problems and call for support, having it pre-built can lead to
shorter problem resolution time.
Greg
Re: Proposal: Remove mod_imap from default list
Posted by André Malo <nd...@perlig.de>.
* Astrid Keßler wrote:
agreed with the removings.
> And I would add:
>
> mod_logio and mod_expire
mod_logio... no. I think 'most' is a good (or say, better) place for it.
But I would consider mod_headers as a base module.
nd
--
Gib' mal folgendes in die Kommandozeile ein (und einen Moment warten):
net send localhost "Buuuh!"
Na, erschreckt? -- Markus Becker in mpdsh
Re: Proposal: Remove mod_imap from default list
Posted by Astrid Keßler <ke...@kess-net.de>.
> 1. This might be a good opportunity to go through the whole list and see
> what should be in and out of a default build. For example, mod_expires
> might be a good addition. Of course, I don't have time to do this myself
> at the moment, so feel free to ignore this comment.
> 2. If we want to keep our contract with the user about the stable series
> valid, this change should go into 2.1 only. Otherwise, users doing a
> "configure; make; make install" or even a "config.status" could get a
> nasty surprise.
+1 to both.
Well, so let's start with the list of current default modules to have a
discussion base. These are:
mod_access
mod_auth
mod_actions
mod_cgi/mod_cgid
mod_alias
mod_dir
mod_userdir
mod_asis
mod_autoindex
mod_env
mod_setenvif
mod_imap
mod_include
mod_log_config
mod_mime
mod_negotiation
mod_status
I suggest to remove from default:
mod_userdir, mod_asis, mod_imap and mod_status
I'm not sure about mod_userdir. It's used, yes, but it need not be
default. I think of mod_userdir as an additional feature.
Most users don't know what to do with mod_asis or how to read
mod_status. The only active installation of mod_status I've ever seen,
has been at beginners first servers. Also mod_asis. I use it myself,
but this need not be a default module. Those, who need it and know whow
to use it, will be able to install the module.
And I would add:
mod_logio and mod_expire
I also would like mod_deflate to become default, but there are much
problems with older browsers, so I'm not sure, it would be a good idea.
Kess
Re: Proposal: Remove mod_imap from default list
Posted by Mads Toftum <ma...@toftum.dk>.
On Sun, Mar 09, 2003 at 09:30:52PM +0100, Lars Eilebrecht wrote:
> According to Rich Bowen:
>
> [Remove mod_imap and mod_asis from the default list]
>
> +1
>
Looking back, I think I've used each module once, but only mod_asis
within the last 5 or 6 years - I suppose most everyone use them
even less, so I'd definetely say it is time to remove them.
vh
Mads Toftum
--
`Darn it, who spiked my coffee with water?!' - lwall
Re: Proposal: Remove mod_imap from default list
Posted by Thom May <th...@planetarytramp.net>.
* David Burry (dburry@tagnet.org) wrote :
> are we talking about removing modules entirely, or just modifying what's
> enabled by default?
>
Just what's enabled by default.
-Thom
mod_asis (was Re: Proposal: Remove mod_imap from default list)
Posted by "support@webmastersguide.com" <ke...@webmastersguide.com>.
> On Mon, 10 Mar 2003, Greg Ames wrote:
>
> > Rich Bowen wrote:
> >
> > > The comment about mod_asis was probably
> > > unwarranted. I think that there are probably people that use mod_asis.
I myself have used it more than once, and I don't get
all that tricky with my code. It allows some things to be
done extremely efficiently that otherwise would require
much less efficient approaches. I'm for leaving it in.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ray B. Morris
support@webmastersguide.com
http://www.WebmastersGuide.com
Re: Proposal: Remove mod_imap from default list
Posted by Dirk-Willem van Gulik <di...@webweaving.org>.
On Mon, 10 Mar 2003, Greg Ames wrote:
> Rich Bowen wrote:
>
> > The comment about mod_asis was probably
> > unwarranted. I think that there are probably people that use mod_asis.
>
> We did use mod_asis on daedalus not too long ago, but don't seem to at present.
> I have no way of knowing how common it is. If we decide to not build it by
> default but then need it again on daedalus, that wouldn't be a big deal.
I've seen it used regularly on older sites; which use it to do clever
forwarding; i.e. without having to invoke perl/php/cgi. It is ages since
I've seen it used for things like 'fishcam' like annimations.
Dw.
Re: Proposal: Remove mod_imap from default list
Posted by Brian Behlendorf <br...@collab.net>.
On Mon, 10 Mar 2003, Greg Ames wrote:
> Rich Bowen wrote:
>
> > The comment about mod_asis was probably
> > unwarranted. I think that there are probably people that use mod_asis.
>
> We did use mod_asis on daedalus not too long ago, but don't seem to at
> present. I have no way of knowing how common it is. If we decide to not
> build it by default but then need it again on daedalus, that wouldn't be
> a big deal.
"fgrep .asis /logs/www/weblog" on daedalus shows only a few hits to
http://www.apache.org/search.html.asis
with a couple of them having as a referrer
http://www.apache.org/search.html
Hmm, looks like there's a search.html.asis that redirects to
http://search.apache.org/. That can probably be simplified.
"locate .asis" turns up a few other hits, might be good to clean those up
too, then watch the error_log for hits to them for the next few days. The
404's in the error_log could probably use some attention anyways.
Brian
Re: Proposal: Remove mod_imap from default list
Posted by Greg Ames <gr...@apache.org>.
Rich Bowen wrote:
> The comment about mod_asis was probably
> unwarranted. I think that there are probably people that use mod_asis.
We did use mod_asis on daedalus not too long ago, but don't seem to at present.
I have no way of knowing how common it is. If we decide to not build it by
default but then need it again on daedalus, that wouldn't be a big deal.
Greg
Re: Proposal: Remove mod_imap from default list
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
On Sun, 9 Mar 2003, David Burry wrote:
> are we talking about removing modules entirely, or just modifying what's
> enabled by default?
I'm only talking about what's enabled by default, and, I was really only
talking about mod_imap. The comment about mod_asis was probably
unwarranted. I think that there are probably people that use mod_asis. I
don't think you could find anyone using mod_imap, and I don't think you
could find a dozen who know what it is.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Justin Erenkrantz" <ju...@erenkrantz.com>
> To: <de...@httpd.apache.org>
> Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2003 8:39 PM
> Subject: Re: Proposal: Remove mod_imap from default list
>
>
> > --On Sunday, March 9, 2003 6:48 PM -0500 Joshua Slive <jo...@slive.ca>
> wrote:
> >
> > > 2. If we want to keep our contract with the user about the stable series
> > > valid, this change should go into 2.1 only. Otherwise, users doing a
> > > "configure; make; make install" or even a "config.status" could get a
> > > nasty surprise.
> >
> > +1. 2.1 is the right place to tweak module default values. And, it's
> also
> > the place to remove modules entirely... 1.3 and 2.0 shouldn't change. --
> > justin
> >
>
>
--
Pilgrim, how you journey on the road you chose
To find out where the winds die and where the stories go
--Pilgrim (Enya - A Day Without Rain)
Re: Proposal: Remove mod_imap from default list
Posted by David Burry <db...@tagnet.org>.
are we talking about removing modules entirely, or just modifying what's
enabled by default?
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Justin Erenkrantz" <ju...@erenkrantz.com>
To: <de...@httpd.apache.org>
Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2003 8:39 PM
Subject: Re: Proposal: Remove mod_imap from default list
> --On Sunday, March 9, 2003 6:48 PM -0500 Joshua Slive <jo...@slive.ca>
wrote:
>
> > 2. If we want to keep our contract with the user about the stable series
> > valid, this change should go into 2.1 only. Otherwise, users doing a
> > "configure; make; make install" or even a "config.status" could get a
> > nasty surprise.
>
> +1. 2.1 is the right place to tweak module default values. And, it's
also
> the place to remove modules entirely... 1.3 and 2.0 shouldn't change. --
> justin
>
Re: Proposal: Remove mod_imap from default list
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
--On Sunday, March 9, 2003 6:48 PM -0500 Joshua Slive <jo...@slive.ca> wrote:
> 2. If we want to keep our contract with the user about the stable series
> valid, this change should go into 2.1 only. Otherwise, users doing a
> "configure; make; make install" or even a "config.status" could get a
> nasty surprise.
+1. 2.1 is the right place to tweak module default values. And, it's also
the place to remove modules entirely... 1.3 and 2.0 shouldn't change. --
justin
Re: Proposal: Remove mod_imap from default list
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
On Sun, 9 Mar 2003, Joshua Slive wrote:
> 1. This might be a good opportunity to go through the whole list and see
> what should be in and out of a default build. For example, mod_expires
> might be a good addition. Of course, I don't have time to do this myself
> at the moment, so feel free to ignore this comment.
On a related note ... I know that we really have nothing to say about
this, but I was wondering if anyone knows who does the builds of Apache
that ship with the various *nix'es out there. Some of them do quite ...
interesting things, re default module lists. It might be nice to know
who to contact to make recommendations.
--
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com
As we trace our own few circles around the sun
We get it backwards and our seven years go by like one
Dog Years (Rush - Test for Echo - 1999)
Re: Proposal: Remove mod_imap from default list
Posted by Joshua Slive <jo...@slive.ca>.
On Sun, 9 Mar 2003, Lars Eilebrecht wrote:
> According to Rich Bowen:
>
> [Remove mod_imap and mod_asis from the default list]
>
> +1
Two comments:
1. This might be a good opportunity to go through the whole list and see
what should be in and out of a default build. For example, mod_expires
might be a good addition. Of course, I don't have time to do this myself
at the moment, so feel free to ignore this comment.
2. If we want to keep our contract with the user about the stable series
valid, this change should go into 2.1 only. Otherwise, users doing a
"configure; make; make install" or even a "config.status" could get a
nasty surprise.
Joshua.
Re: Proposal: Remove mod_imap from default list
Posted by Lars Eilebrecht <la...@hyperreal.org>.
According to Rich Bowen:
[Remove mod_imap and mod_asis from the default list]
+1
ciao...
--
Lars Eilebrecht - All the simple programs have been
lars@hyperreal.org - written, and all the good names taken.