On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 1:08 AM, Eric Covener <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't fully understand your report, but I see "there is no > autoindex" is bogus since this is a fixup and autoindex is a handler. > Seems like maybe it's broken multiple ways. Probably best to scrap it > (tomorrow)
It definitely blocks autoindex which I think means it has to go, but for me only when you actually use a fallbackresource. I am still not understannding the other scenario outlined where no fallbackresource at all changes the behavior of accessing a static file.
