[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Interchange by date
][Interchange by thread
]
[ic] access_gating whole catalog?
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 10:14:05PM -0400, Mike Heins wrote:
>
> Quoting Mike Heins (mike@perusion.com):
> >
> > I will certainly look at changing 4.9 and enabling it in the root
> > directory as an option. I have not examined that code in quite some
> > time, and it is always good to revisit previous decisions and see if
> > they still make sense. 8-)
>
> Looking at it, it seems to make sense only if I redo the entire
> way this is all checked and specified. Or if I make the root
> .access enable .access_gate checking in all subdirectories...
> I am not sure of the implications of that.
>
> I really hesitate to add yet another file test and corresponding
> directory lookup. The routine that uses this, Vend::Util::readin,
> is used in virtually every IC transaction.
>
> I have long thought about incorporating Apache-style .htaccess control.
> Part of the reason I did not originally is that Interchange has roots in
> times when Apache was nowhere near as dominant as it is now -- it was
> far from clear in 1996 (at least to me) what was going to happen.
>
> Were I to do it, I would probably want to integrate with Apache
> so that DBI authorizations and cookies from Apache::Session
> could be shared. That would take a lot of work.
Apache is dominant, yes, but I don't like the idea of IC depending
on it. Coupling tightly not only means other web servers
won't work but it may well lock people even into a specific version
of Apache. That **decreases** reliability. I don't need software
that breaks when I run apt-get upgrade. The biggest chunk of our
downtime is upgrade time.
You get something like Apache2 + mod_perl which might well
require perl5.8+ and the upgrade path becomes a nightmare or
even impossible for anyone not running out-of-the-box configurations
with specific versions. We stay on the bleeding edge so it
is usually easier for us.
IC doesn't use mod_perl - though it is there in config, why? -
which doesn't work anyway with Apache2 so my head is starting to
really hurt because I can't put it on same machine as this and that
site. Clear interface, separate daemons and separate processes
please!
>
> Since we are close to a code freeze on Interchange, and I have
> several tasks to do before that happens, I will probably not
> get to that sweeping a change.
>
> So bottom line, I would like to keep .access checking the sam
> and have any future work and complexity go toward something more
> useful like emulating Apache Options settings.
In this particular case, where the web server can do it, why
should IC do it?
>
> --
> Mike Heins
> Perusion -- Expert Interchange Consulting http://www.perusion.com/
> phone +1.513.523.7621 <mike@perusion.com>
>
> Software axiom: Lack of speed kills.
>
> _______________________________________________
> interchange-users mailing list
> interchange-users@icdevgroup.org
> http://www.icdevgroup.org/mailman/listinfo/interchange-users
>
--
Christopher F. Miller, Publisher cfm@maine.com
MaineStreet Communications, Inc 208 Portland Road, Gray, ME 04039
1.207.657.5078 http://www.maine.com/
Content/site management, online commerce, internet integration, Debian linux