I wonder if, for (too?)strict compatibiliy, we shouldn't add an
argument/suffix the name for directives modified to now support
expressions, in the quite (too?)unlikely case where the original value
contained a plain "%{whatever}" text or path (probably not concerning
URLs since "%{" is illegal there).
Just to disambiguate...This has probably already been done in the past without (noticeable) issue, so I may be paranoid here. Just in case, regarding 2.4.13 this concerns (AFAICT): - http://svn.apache.org/r1663259 (already backported to 2.4.13) - http://svn.apache.org/r1663124 - http://svn.apache.org/r1661448 - ...? ( nothing against Graham of course which did all this good and very valuable job ;) Am I too paranoid and the leading "%{" is enough? Regards, Yann.
