On 06 Mar 2015, at 2:10 PM, Yann Ylavic <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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.
If we did that I believe we’d just have an explosion of directives and
confusion.
Regards,
Graham
—
