httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Ruggeri <DRugg...@primary.net>
Subject Re: Plea for eyes (and votes) on STATUS proposals
Date Wed, 23 Jan 2013 18:00:46 GMT
On 1/23/2013 11:30 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> iirc, there were people who did not like that :)
>
> Do you mean PPI in *addition to* BI?

Yes - I always believe in giving the admin the control to decide the
what's and how... The case of ProxyPass at server level (regardless of a
balancer in play or not) is enough to have ProxyPassInherit as a
companion to BalancerInherit.

Regarding the first statement, (maybe I read the conversation wrong) I
don't think Graham's concerns were an outright objection to the idea. I
think he asked for the same stuff I mentioned in the STATUS file - just
better documentation to understand what does/does not get changed as a
result of disabling these directives and the inconsistencies that could
occur when enabled.

I'm sure it goes without saying, but I will anyway. To avoid very
confused server admins, it's important that these default to "On" and
preserve the way things have always been (this is what has been
proposed, after all).

--
Daniel Ruggeri


Mime
View raw message