On Tue, 24 Dec 2002, Astrid Kessler wrote: > > Would anyone object if I change the "TransferLog" directive in ssl.conf > > to a CustomLog directive? > > +1 to change this. > > I'm also wondering why we do not mark the TransferLog directive as > deprecated and remove them in a later release 2.2 or 2.4 or so. In my eyes > it's only a short form of CustomLog which is easy to use but not really > neccessary and may confuse the user. Or do I miss something? >
I agree, but this was discussed and rejected before 2.0 was released. Some smart people (Marc Slemko and some others) believe that forcing people to use complex directives in place of simple ones is a bad idea. My opinion is that CustomLog isn't more complex, it's just more verbose. Anyway, if you want to start up the argument again, go for it. But be aware it happened before. Joshua.
