Return-Path: 
 <dev-return-19633-apmail-httpd-dev-archive=httpd.apache.org@httpd.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@httpd.apache.org
Received: (qmail 9418 invoked by uid 500); 27 Aug 2001 14:45:54 -0000
Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
list-help: <mailto:dev-help@httpd.apache.org>
list-unsubscribe: <mailto:dev-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org>
list-post: <mailto:dev@httpd.apache.org>
Delivered-To: mailing list dev@httpd.apache.org
Received: (qmail 9402 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 14:45:54 -0000
Message-ID: <02a401c12f07$06d678c0$71381b09@sashimi>
From: "Bill Stoddard" <bill@wstoddard.com>
To: <dev@httpd.apache.org>, <rbb@covalent.net>
References: <0a3d01c12eb7$898481e0$95c0b0d0@roweclan.net>
 <0ab401c12ef2$430aa920$95c0b0d0@roweclan.net>
 <00a501c12ef7$742b9e60$71381b09@sashimi>
 <01082706372400.14604@koj.rkbloom.net>
Subject: Re: location walk before directory walk
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:46:15 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N
Status: O
X-Status: 
X-Keywords: 
X-UID: 1390

> > I think what Roy is suggesting is that we eliminate the second
> > LocationWalk. I am a tentative +1 on his suggestion. And it doesn't make
> > sense to allow Location directives in .htaccess files (use of Location
> > implies we are not serving out of the file system anyway). I don't see any
> > problems right off hand...
>
> Just a question, but what if you are using .htaccess files to partition things
> up for virtual hosts?  For example, I am running a server and both Roy and
> Bill have sites on it.  Since I am a control freak, I refuse to give either access
> to httpd.conf, but because I am also lazy, I have allowed both to use
> .htaccess files.  In that case, don't people need to be able to put <localtion>
> directives inside of .htaccess files?
>

Perhaps. I'm taking a very narrow view of the purpose for Location directives (which may
or may not be "right"). If we are serving content from the file system, then we should use
File/Directory et. al. directives. If the content we are serving is not backed by a file
system, then we should use Location directives. And the two should not overlap.  Given
those conditions, should the site admin (bill/roy) be able to control (via Location
directives) any aspect of how a back-end, non file system based content generator is
configured? Examples?

Bill