httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject Re: svn commit: r925858 - in /httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x: CHANGES STATUS docs/manual/mod/core.xml server/config.c
Date Mon, 29 Mar 2010 23:08:27 GMT
On 3/29/2010 5:59 PM, Graham Leggett wrote:
> 
> As it turns out that the optional behaviour is the current default
> behaviour, and because you were not aware of this when you made your
> suggestion above, it is necessary for the option to become IncludeStrict
> instead of IncludeOptional.

Trunk is not released, it is still up for discussion.  You (and I, and the
few other very active committers) cannot expect people to keep up with the
pace of commits, as much as we would like to.

The veto applies to trunk, as well.  It's just that it's not terribly
disruptive to leave the vetoed code on trunk, since it is very unlikely
we will tag GA in the coming days or weeks.  I have no dispute with the
code itself, so I don't see a reason to disrupt the work of coming to
an acceptable agreement.

The 2.2 branch behavior is that filenames do not require a match.  File
paths do require a match.  I have suggested that the typical user, even
the experienced user is paying attention to Include [foo] as a literal,
and is harmed when [foo] is accepted and does not exist.  This makes as
much sense as allowing LoadModule [foo] or LoadFile [foo] to succeed
when [foo] does not exist.

If a very small minority of users desire a feature that is harmful to the
general community, the onus is on the minority of users to propose and
implement their feature in a way that doesn't disrupt the vast majority
of users, or cause them inconvenience.




Mime
View raw message