Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 36580 invoked by uid 500); 5 Nov 2001 16:05:55 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 36559 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2001 16:05:50 -0000 From: "Joshua Slive" To: Subject: RE: mod_ssl doc Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 11:07:14 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <010b01c1660e$d05214a0$4c381b09@sashimi> X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N > From: Bill Stoddard [mailto:bill@wstoddard.com] > Sounds reasonable. It's worth mentioning that the format of > Ralf's SSL doc is quite > different from the format of the rest of the Apache > documentation. I see no compelling > reasons to be consistent here. In a perfect world, the docs would all look the same. But until we have a better system for handling that, I don't see a good reason to strip all the formating out of Ralf's carefully designed (and pretty nice looking) docs. Perhaps once you dump the stuff in I will look at redoing the reference part so that it fits more into the apache module docs. (This is the place that we have the most structure already, and where it would be most confusing to the user if things are not where they expect.) But the rest of it can stay pretty much as is. JOshua.