forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ross Gardler <rgard...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Comment on index.html (Re: Where to change comments to configuration files)
Date Tue, 03 May 2005 08:49:19 GMT
Ferdinand Soethe wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Ross Gardler wrote:
> 
> (about this comment
> 
> FS> <!-- Note: No matter what you configure here, Forrest will always try to load
> FS>        index.html when you request http://yourHost/
> FS> -->>
> )
> 
> RG> I'm -1 on the current comment as it gives the impression that it *can't*
> RG> be changed. This is bad. If someone needs to change it and they read
> RG> that comment then they will not bother to search the docs/ask on the
> RG> mailing lists.
> 
> RG> In my opinion it's better to have something undocumented (and therefore
> RG> prompt questions) than to have it incorrectly documented.
> 
> I disagree here. It might have been ok to just leave it before we knew
> about the inconsistencies it will create if you don't use index.html.

As far as I am aware the only inconsistency is that the index page 
credits will no longer work. Thorsten has already said this is fixed in 
views and I have said it is easy to fix in skins if my existing 
suggestions are tested and prove to be correct.

> Taking the comment out, people will just fall into the trap and perhaps
> not even know until the put their site on a server.

I'm not -1 on the comment, only -1 on the current wording. My issue is 
that it gives the false impression that it is not a configurable feature.

> I feel that inquisitive minds will stumple about the comment and come
> back asking for the reasons behind this or ways around this anyway.

In my experience users don't ask questions if something is written in 
the docs. Potential devs might, but users don't.

> In fact, thinking about it, I'd probably extend that comment to tell
> you that you have to have an index.html in the root for things to work
> properly.

But that simply is not correct. It *is* configurable as I have written 
on a number of occasions now.

> Apart from that:
> 
> Putting sufficient info to explain the whole situation into that
> comment will take perhaps 20 lines. That is a bit much for my taste.
> If it is not, I'll happily add that.

So put a link to a document that provides those twenty lines.

> Or I could either add a line to refer people to this thread or write
> up a short faq that sums up the facts about changing index.html and
> refer to that.

FAQ's are good.

Ross

Mime
View raw message