Re: simple-conf ready for merge
--On Wednesday, April 6, 2005 10:42 AM -0400 Joshua Slive [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm pretty-much done shredding the default config and I will give a couple days for review before I merge it. Feel free to correct any problems you see. +1 to merge back to trunk. (14k vs. 38k. Yay!) One last thought: do we really need 'UseCanonicalName Off' - isn't our unset default equivalent? Same goes for HostnameLookups (the unset default is Off). IMHO, these seem more appropriate for httpd-default.conf. -- justin
Re: simple-conf ready for merge
--On Wednesday, April 6, 2005 12:49 PM -0500 William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The reason not to drop them is that when the gods of httpd ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) decide to change their minds about the 'default' choice, it doesn't harm existing installations which were explicitly configured tested and deployed. Isn't that a good thing? If the admin doesn't know any better, why should our prior mistakes come back to haunt us? -- justin
Re: simple-conf ready for merge
On Wed, 6 Apr 2005, Joshua Slive wrote: I think this config is far clearer and more manageable for a newcomer, and probably also for an experienced httpd-user. It is also more secure I know this is propably too controversial; but one thing I'd love to have in there is somethign like Directory / AllowOverride none order allow,deny deny from all /Directory Just to make crystal clear tha the default should be a no. Dw
Re: simple-conf ready for merge
Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote: On Wed, 6 Apr 2005, Joshua Slive wrote: I think this config is far clearer and more manageable for a newcomer, and probably also for an experienced httpd-user. It is also more secure I know this is propably too controversial; but one thing I'd love to have in there is somethign like Directory / AllowOverride none order allow,deny deny from all /Directory Just to make crystal clear tha the default should be a no. It's there already in 2.1 (but not 2.0). Joshua.
Re: simple-conf ready for merge
Brad Nicholes wrote: I'm still not a big fan of removing the MPM settings from the httpd.conf file. All of the other extra .conf files contain supplemental configuration but the MPM configuration seems to be more along the lines of a ServerRoot or Listen. Despite the fact that these are technically module directives, MPM directives just feel more like core directives. It's not really a question of core/module. Lots of core directives were removed too. The question is: Is this a directive that many/most users need to change? For most of the mpm directives, the answer is clearly no. (Although you could argue about something like MaxClients/MaxThreads.) [ Side note: The other question is How much confusion does the presence of these directives add to the config file? That mess of IfModule xxx_mpm was horribly confusing IMHO. That could be solved by intelligently including only the section for the relevant mpm in the default config, but that would require more complex build changes than I am up to. ] Joshua.
Re: simple-conf ready for merge
I see your rational, but I am looking at it from the point of view that the user knows that one of the first things that they need to do is tweak the MPM to fit their load/resource requirements. This is more a matter of where it they go? I could have sworn they were right here a minute ago. And I certainly wouldn't classify them as extra. [ Side note: The other question is How much confusion does the presence of these directives add to the config file? That mess of IfModule xxx_mpm was horribly confusing IMHO. That could be solved by intelligently including only the section for the relevant mpm in the default config, but that would require more complex build changes than I am up to. I agree, but I would still rather see only the applicable platform MPM directives anyway no matter whether they are implemented in httpd.conf or extra/httpd-mpm.conf. Brad [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wednesday, April 06, 2005 1:17:10 PM Brad Nicholes wrote: I'm still not a big fan of removing the MPM settings from the httpd.conf file. All of the other extra .conf files contain supplemental configuration but the MPM configuration seems to be more along the lines of a ServerRoot or Listen. Despite the fact that these are technically module directives, MPM directives just feel more like core directives. It's not really a question of core/module. Lots of core directives were removed too. The question is: Is this a directive that many/most users need to change? For most of the mpm directives, the answer is clearly no. (Although you could argue about something like MaxClients/MaxThreads.) [ Side note: The other question is How much confusion does the presence of these directives add to the config file? That mess of IfModule xxx_mpm was horribly confusing IMHO. That could be solved by intelligently including only the section for the relevant mpm in the default config, but that would require more complex build changes than I am up to. ] Joshua.
