On Wednesday, October 2, 2002, at 08:07 PM, Joshua Slive wrote: > > > <Location /> > <limitexcept GET> > require valid-user > </limitexcept> > </location> > > <directory /> > require valid-user > </directory> > > This has the effect of leaving GET unrestricted, according to the bug > report. Is this correct behavior? It seems like, since the other > methods > are not change by the <limitexcept>, the require should still apply to > them. >
what jerry brought up here definitely seems like a bug to me. Not sure why folks are in such disbelief :) i'll check into it - sterling
