Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
From: Nick Kew <nick@webthing.com>
Organization: WebThing Ltd
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: mod_access vs mod_authz_host
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2005 16:26:57 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.8.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200511031627.00001.nick@webthing.com>

Is there really a rationale for that name change?

This module is *not* an authz module in the sense of anything from
the used-to-be-auth modules are.
  * It lives on a different request processing hook.
  * Its semantics, and even HTTP failure code, are different.
  * it uses TCP information rather than HTTP information. 
  * It has a clear but *distinct* relationship with the real authz,
    expressed in the Satisfy Any|All directive.

Reverting the name to mod_access will make it immediately more
accessible to users (a name they know), and reduce the scope
for future confusion.  How about it?


-- 
Nick Kew