RE: [Webware-discuss] Status of HTTPAdapter

[Terrel S. <tsh...@jd...>]

On Fri, 2002-12-06 at 19:56, Ian Bicking wrote:

> In fact, what would be really cool is if Pound could be made to connect
> via SCGI.  I believe it already does some HTTP/1.1 -> HTTP/1.0
> translation, and going that last step to SCGI probably wouldn't be too
> hard.  

The prime directive for pound seems to be simplicity and security over
features. However, they did include a contribution for WebDAV support.
It can't hurt to ask.

> I was thinking it would be need to have mod_webkit/SCGI support
> in some small web server (thttp or something), but really it seems like
> Pound would be even better.  The only negative is that it's nice to be
> able to serve some static content directly without the
> AppServer/double-connection overhead.

Boa <http://www.boa.org/> seems to be more actively maintained than
either pound or thttpd, but I could be wrong.

I would be very interested in boa supporting SCGI.