polishing out Apache::Test

[changing subject as we are far from discussing unimport here]

Geoffrey Young wrote:

> > You know what? I think we should educate the users to use env vars. 
>
>
> doesn't that sorta happen now - throw an error message if it can't find 
> a suitable Apache?  granted, it could be more explicit, maybe even 
> including your CPAN shell one-liner below.

Yes, by 'educating' I meant to document it better, more prominent.

> > The problem is that we have two mod_perl versions, so setting the 
> > APACHE env var is not a solution, since how do we set it for 2 
> > versions. What I mean is, I'd like to have a set of env vars in my 
> > .profile/.cshrc/.whatever and never think twice, just selecting the 
> > version I want to build with. So I'd have:
> >
> > env MOD_PERL=1 perl -MCPAN -eshell
> > and
> > env MOD_PERL=2 perl -MCPAN -eshell
> >
> > if we could achieve that, it'd be fantastic. So may be we need to 
> > support APACHE and APACHE2, APXS and APXS2, so if we see MOD_PERL=2, 
> > we look for APACHE2 and APXS2 env vars.
>
> well, I can see how that would benefit developers, but I'm not so sure 
> that we have to go through all that trouble for end-users.  typically, 
> they would be using/developing either one version or the other and not 
> messing around with both (at least not in the volume that you do :)  so, 
> I'd expect that educating them as to

Not everybody, but some will need to work with both. Why not making it easier 
for them.

> $ APXS=/usr/local/apache2/bin/apxs perl -MCPAN -eshell
>
> is quite sufficient.  personally, I have apache1 and apache2 aliases set 
> up to do my exporting for me :)

I was thinking about having the env vars set in the startup file. So later on 
you just have to set MOD_PERL=2 or MOD_PERL=1.

So I do propose to change Apache::Test to use:
APXS APACHE APACHE_GROUP APACHE_USER APACHE_PORT
when it detects mod_perl 1.0 and to use:
APXS2 APACHE2 APACHE2_GROUP APACHE2_USER APACHE2_PORT
when it detects mod_perl 2.0.

Anybody has a problem with this change? Conceptually of course, I doubt 
anybody has to change their code or anything (other than you, Geoff, and me).

> > I'm also still bothered with this MOD_PERL vs. MODPERL thing, we 
> > really need to stick to a single way to write it. (same for macros.)
>
>
> yeah.

I think that since we have a casted in stone $ENV{MOD_PERL}, we should stick 
with the underscore everywhere else.

For XS code we have used -DMOD_PERL, my question is whether we should have 
-DMOD_PERL2 or -DMOD_PERL=2

>  > Also I'm planning to release Apache::Test on CPAN soon. What do you 
> think?
>
> that's great.  actually, its a long time in coming.

;)

> if you're thinking about doing this, a mod_perl 2.0 CPAN release might 
> also be nice 

What do you mean? It's been released every time a new version was announced. 
It's just invisible through indexer, because of the _09 segment. You can still 
get it from doug's CPAN dir.

> - that way you can have a PREREQ_PM mod_perl version that 
> corresponds to an Apache::Test CPAN release, thus making third party 
> modules (or said article :) that support mod_perl 1.99_09 capable of 
> being used as examples of how Apache::Test works for both 2.0 and (if 
> you want to get it from CPAN) 1.0.  I don't mean to say that this will 
> be required for each release, but we've come pretty far on third party 
> module support recently so it would be nice to have them in sync once we 
> settle down.

I plan to keep Apache::Test, distributed with mod_perl 2.0 as well as 
separately. I'm not sure what are asking for. Can you please explain?

Should we release Apache::Test as 1.0 or 0.01? I think it deserves to have 
version 1.0.


__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman            JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/     mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:stas@xxxxxxxxxx http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org   http://ticketmaster.com