Re: mod_ssl

["Ralf S. Engelschall" <rs...@engelschall.com>]

In article <Pi...@nebula.lyra.org> you wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Dec 1999, Eli Marmor wrote:
> [...]
> I would simply recommend keeping mod_ssl as a patch set.

Yes, me too. Although etablishing an all-in-one package is appreciated by the
users, it would in practice lead to some sort of a split between the official
version of Apache and the "enhanced" version. At least I personally will not
accept to play this game myself, because technically it doesn't provide real
benefits and at the same time it would bother some other people. If someone
other wants to do it, ok. But I personally will not do this, because it would
also require lots of additional responsibleness I don't want to take (because
I see not where this really is worth the effort).

So, until mod_ssl could be really fully integrated into Apache (if the
export stuff is solved sometimes in the future, etc.) its ok to leave
it a separate package. But nevertheless it would be REALLY useful for
the community to have EAPI included into Apache 1.3.0 as _OPTIONAL_ part
(fully #ifdef'ed as it already is). This way it doesn't hurt Apache-SSL
or any other modules, but the "patching" is reduced to a minimum.

                                       Ralf S. Engelschall
                                       rse@engelschall.com
                                       www.engelschall.com

Re: mod_ssl

[Ben Laurie <be...@algroup.co.uk>]

"Ralf S. Engelschall" wrote:
> 
> In article <Pi...@nebula.lyra.org> you wrote:
> > On Sun, 12 Dec 1999, Eli Marmor wrote:
> > [...]
> > I would simply recommend keeping mod_ssl as a patch set.
> 
> Yes, me too. Although etablishing an all-in-one package is appreciated by the
> users, it would in practice lead to some sort of a split between the official
> version of Apache and the "enhanced" version. At least I personally will not
> accept to play this game myself, because technically it doesn't provide real
> benefits and at the same time it would bother some other people. If someone
> other wants to do it, ok. But I personally will not do this, because it would
> also require lots of additional responsibleness I don't want to take (because
> I see not where this really is worth the effort).
> 
> So, until mod_ssl could be really fully integrated into Apache (if the
> export stuff is solved sometimes in the future, etc.) its ok to leave
> it a separate package. But nevertheless it would be REALLY useful for
> the community to have EAPI included into Apache 1.3.0 as _OPTIONAL_ part
> (fully #ifdef'ed as it already is). This way it doesn't hurt Apache-SSL
> or any other modules, but the "patching" is reduced to a minimum.

Not that it is a big deal, but clearly the EAPI patches would be
_exactly_ where the Apache-SSL patches are, which would indeed be
painful for Apache-SSL.

Cheers,

Ben.

--
SECURE HOSTING AT THE BUNKER! http://www.thebunker.net/hosting.htm

http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html

"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
     - Indira Gandhi