Re: apache.make

[Helge Hess]

Nicola Pero wrote:
> > This way we would just have a single Apache module capable of loading
> > different NSBundle's containing the 'real' Apache handler. IMHO this
> > would be much better and consistent with Foundation.
> 
> I am not very sure how this would cope with Apache's dynamic loading of
> Apache modules - but you probably know so I trust you it can be done. :-)

The bundle would be loaded by the GS module (and therefore by gstep-base
dynamic loading code), not by Apache itself.

> `Objective-C servlets'. 

Personally I do not see a big difference between 'servlet' and 'Apache
module'. 'servlet' as a word only has a bad Java touch ;-)
I don't see why an 'ObjC-servlet' shouldn't be able to patch Apache as
deep as a native Apache module.

> My idea of the thing at this point is approximately as follows:
1,2,3 ;-)

> Helge, does this plan satisfy you ?  Something important I missed ?

Sounds fine to me.

> Any other comments/suggestions ?

Well, I think it would be nice if such an 'Objective-C' servlet would
have the same API like session-less WebObjects (well, if we use a
WOSessionStore that saves to the filesystem [or some other process
independend store] we could even support sessions).
We could invent an ApacheRequestHandler which supports the whole Apache
API as the default request handler.

I think I like the idea a lot and if 1 and 2 work fine I could take a
look into that (and make the result opensource) since I would like to
rewrite the SKYRiX Apache adaptor anyway.

Does gstep-base already support the extended MacOSX-public-beta API for
key-value coding ?

Greetings
  Helge
-- 
SKYRIX Software AG - http://www.skyrix.com