couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Anderson <jch...@apache.org>
Subject Re: %2F vs /
Date Wed, 14 Oct 2009 18:03:44 GMT
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:43 AM, Jason Davies <jason@jasondavies.com> wrote:
> Hi Sven,
>
> On 14/10/2009 18:34, Sven Helmberger wrote:
>
>> There seem to have been multiple iterations how %2F is treated vs / in
>> different access scenarios, with the current (0.10.0) behaviour seeming
>> a little odd. First, there suddenly was a 301 response somewhere where
>> it wasn't before. While accessing design documents, %2F using URLs get
>> redirected to / ones which makes the new apache http client 4.0 java lib
>> puke because it (rightfully, I think?) complains that it is receiving a
>> redirect to the same URL which it interprets as endless loop thus being
>> exception worthy.
>
> We redirect /dbname/_design%2F/foo to /dbname/_design/foo.  These aren't the
> same URLs, so there shouldn't be an endless loop here, unless your library
> is prematurely decoding URL-encoded characters.
>
> As for whether this is a good thing or not, I'm ambivalent at the moment.
>  I'm not 100% sure, but I think the main reason for special-casing design
> docs in this way was to make developing CouchApps easier (you can use
> ../app2 instead of ../../_design%2Fapp2).
>

My motivation in adding the redirect was that anytime users see %2F on
the screen it's a total bug. If design docs are the entry points for
CouchApps, then their URLs are always on the screen. If they have %2F
in them then we have just shafted our users bad.

I know it's a bit special-casey but I hope you understand the
motivation is user comfort.

Chris




-- 
Chris Anderson
http://jchrisa.net
http://couch.io

Mime
View raw message