Return-Path: 
 <docs-return-4194-apmail-httpd-docs-archive=httpd.apache.org@httpd.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-docs-archive@httpd.apache.org
Received: (qmail 38422 invoked by uid 500); 7 Oct 2002 16:51:35 -0000
Mailing-List: contact docs-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
list-help: <mailto:docs-help@httpd.apache.org>
list-unsubscribe: <mailto:docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org>
list-post: <mailto:docs@httpd.apache.org>
Reply-To: docs@httpd.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list docs@httpd.apache.org
Received: (qmail 38392 invoked from network); 7 Oct 2002 16:51:35 -0000
Message-ID: <3DA1BB97.3080905@slive.ca>
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 12:51:35 -0400
From: Joshua Slive <joshua@slive.ca>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;
 rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, fr
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: docs@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0/docs/manual/mod mod_authn_anon.html.en
References: <20021007084633.67100.qmail@icarus.apache.org>
 <3DA19366.2030000@slive.ca> <20021007163925.GB17439@scotch.ics.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N

Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> Hmm.  Then, how do you handle mappings of the directives?  If we
> keep the old docs, then we have duplicate directives.  I'd be
> especially concerned in the directives*.html files.

An obvious solution would be to mark the old modules as 
<status>obsolete</status> and have the index generation code ignore them.

> 
> I would prefer we do not handle backwards compatibility.
> 
> (Much in the same way, we chose to abandon it in the code.)

I don't have strong opinions about it.

> AFAIK, for the most part, user configurations need not change.  The
> only required change is in the handling of the *Authoritative
> directives.  If the user relies on that, a simple reading of the
> documentation should suffice to resolve that.

OK.  But at least a mention of the module renaming needs to be added to 
the upgrading docs.  If you don't get around to it, I'm sure someone 
else will eventually.

> 
> I could be wrong in that the change requires more user intervention,
> but my current understanding is that it doesn't.  It really needs
> feedback and review by others - I committed what I could because
> OtherBill was rambling about vetoing the code because I didn't update
> the docs.  -- justin

No problem here.  Just working on getting loose ends tied up.

Joshua.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org