Date: Sun, 8 Feb 1998 16:50:29 -0800 (PST)
From: Dean Gaudet <dgaudet@arctic.org>
To: new-httpd@apache.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: apache-1.3/src/main http_main.c http_protocol.c 
In-Reply-To: <9802081634.aa27040@paris.ics.uci.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.96dg4.980208164758.11471Q-100000@twinlark.arctic.org>
Organization: Transmeta Corp.
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org

On Sun, 8 Feb 1998, Roy T. Fielding wrote:

> >And I still completely disagree with both you and Chuck, who are the only
> >two complaining about this... and neither of you have to take the time to
> >tell users "no ignore that stupid warning" when they open PRs about it. 
> 
> That has already been fixed in 1.3b -- warnings are not printed by default.
> The users that are complaining are still using 1.2.

Oh give me a break, so many things are turned off by raising the LogLevel
that this is running blind.  In fact the whole LogLevel thing still hasn't
been cleaned up imho -- we get worse reports from default 1.3 than we did
from 1.2.  "worse" in the sense that a lot of useful information is just
not logged.

> >This warning/notice/whatever is useless.  It diagnoses a normal situation. 
> 
> There is nothing normal about failure to deliver content.  The warning
> is necessary for sites with audited access files and any server placed
> in an environment where "browsing" is not the norm.  That is why it
> is a warning and not an error.

"audited access files" ?  If anything the error logs are not audited, and
this is already represented in the access_log by a lower bytes_sent.  I
don't buy any of this argument. 

Dean