On 02/27/2017 03:19 AM, Joe Orton wrote:
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 10:00:08PM +0100, Yann Ylavic wrote:
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 11:47 AM, Joe Orton <jor...@redhat.com> wrote:
(b) for <IfDirective foo> match both "foo" and "<foo".
I'd vote for this, it's very unlikely that some day we want to add a
directive called VirtualHost or If (w/o the leading '<') which may
conflict here, so it shouldn't hurt.
I'm fine with that, I'll commit like this unless anybody else has strong
opinions.
mod_lua (in trunk at least) apparently ships both a '<LuaXXX>' and
'LuaXXX' version of several directives. It wouldn't surprise me to find
that other third-party modules have a "block version" of a normal
directive with the same name. I'm kind of -0.5 to making the two collide.
Is there a good reason that quoting the argument to a block gives a
syntax error? Can we fix that instead?
--Jacob
