As far as I've seen, directive names used within the corresponding
<directivesynopsis> bloc do not have a link to themselves.
That's why I have removed some in this commit.
In the same commit, I've also added some missing module= for some other
directives in order to keep the link to them.
As an example, in this commit, you can find:
+ <directive>AuthLDAPSubGroupAttribute</directive> directive identifies the
+ labels of group members and the <directive module="mod_authnz_ldap"
+ >AuthLDAPGroupAttribute</directive>
No module= for AuthLDAPSubGroupAttribute but one for
AuthLDAPGroupAttribute, because we are in the AuthLDAPSubGroupAttribute
<directivesynopsis> bloc.
I've never seen this "rule" written anywhere, but it looks a quite
classical way to do within the online doc.
I personally find it logical and it helps, IMHO, to quickly see if the
explanation we are reading it about the current directive or if it is
related to something else, which can be found somewhere else.
If module= everywhere is the preferred way, that's good for me and will
update accordingly.
BTW, I will backport port these changes during the WE but I'm in the
process to synch 2.4 and trunk for this given file. Started but not
finished yet.
CJ
Le 26/03/2016 13:51, Eric Covener a écrit :
On Sat, Mar 26, 2016 at 3:51 AM, <jaillet...@apache.org> wrote:
- module="mod_authnz_ldap">AuthLDAPBindPassword</directive> if you
+ >AuthLDAPBindPassword</directive> if you
absolutely need them to search the directory.</p>
I am in the habit of always adding module= so we get the directive as
a hyperlink. Is there a rationale for removing them?
