NGINX Open Source: Reflecting Back and Looking Ahead

41–42 of 42 posts

Re: NGINX Open Source: Reflecting Back and Looking Ahead

#41

Post by Apofis » Fri, Apr 17, 2015, 8:54 PM UTC

MichaelGG wrote: post #18

Apofis wrote: post #7

It's annoying that they took SPDY support out of Community and put it into Plus. Want updates? Too bad, you gotta recompile.

Citation? I just installed nginx 1.7 on Ubunutu using a PPA and nginx -V says "--with-http_spdy_module".

This is very strange...

Just tried it with Nginx 1.7.11 from release and then mainline Nginx 1.7.12 and on both I got nginx -V to output --with-http_spdy_module

But when I put in "pagespeed on (and the rest of the settings) into http { in /etc/nginx/nginx.conf

I get in /var/log/nginx/error.log: unknown directive "pagespeed" in /etc/nginx/nginx.conf:56

How is this possible?

Edit: I finally figured it out... the Nginx configuration on https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/module/configu... it out of date. It's much simpler to setup spdy now. Simply add "spdy" to the nginx server config like this: listen 127.0.0.1:8082 spdy;

Re: NGINX Open Source: Reflecting Back and Looking Ahead

#42

Post by justizin » Mon, Apr 20, 2015, 11:09 PM UTC

Syrup-tan wrote: post #22

justizin wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not really accurate, and you kind of conflict with yourself. The JS VM will be part of Nginx Open-Source, as will the Pluggable Module API. Nginx Plus is a platform, not just a special version of Nginx open-source, where Nginx is a core component.

That's not how I read his comment, though re-reading his comment I see how you read it that way. I read it as a list of hi-lights from the article, and I assume that's how he meant it to be read; - interesting things will move to the premium version - JS VM to power future versions - pluggable module API coming

What I meant is, aren't those other features interesting things? I just think that saying "interesting things will move to the premium version" is a bit reductive. Rather than a TL;DR, it directly contradicts what is put forth in the article, and replaces it with what a lot of us might assume is the case if we hadn't read the article.

It may not have been meant to come across the way I objected. :)

Post reply on HN