From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id VAA14777; Sat, 16 Aug 2003 21:54:33 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA19370 for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2003 21:54:32 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from main.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.224.249]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id h7GJsTf20384 for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2003 21:54:31 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from list by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19o79F-0003NI-00 for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2003 21:55:37 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: caml-list@inria.fr Received: from sea.gmane.org ([80.91.224.252]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19o79E-0003NA-00 for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2003 21:55:36 +0200 Received: from news by sea.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19o788-0004Xv-00 for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2003 21:54:28 +0200 From: Alan Post Subject: [Caml-list] Re: mod_caml 0.5 Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 19:54:28 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <20030816104504.GA21132@redhat.com> <20030816110256.GA6481@roke.freak> <20030816111030.GA21418@redhat.com> X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (NetBSD) X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; michal:01 moskal:01 api:01 superset:01 thread-safe:01 callbacks:01 adapting:01 caml:01 0200,:01 patch:02 module:03 wrote:03 rewrite:04 redhat:05 aug:05 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk In article <20030816111030.GA21418@redhat.com>, Richard Jones wrote: > On Sat, Aug 16, 2003 at 01:02:56PM +0200, Michal Moskal wrote: >> >> Any plans for Apache 2.0? > > It's something I've been thinking about, but I don't know how much > in the API changed. ie. Is it a small patch or a huge rewrite? The 2.0 API is mostly a superset of the 1.3 API. Porting your 1.3 module to 2.0 would mostly be a matter of making sure it is thread-safe. The way that callbacks are registered has changed, but adapting to that would be pretty straightforward. > Also I don't actually know many people using Apache 2.0 :-) I think it's really necessary only for people using MicroSoft Windows. Hence, probably people you don't know. :) ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners