Shawn Walker wrote: > Danek Duvall wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 02:41:40PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote: >> >>> Stephen Hahn wrote: >>>> * Shawn Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-08-20 19:09]: >>>>> I think I may have chosen a poor name for the setting :/ >>>> There's plenty of time to change it. Surely the blog and content >>>> management software packages must have a name for this we can reuse >>>> (if it's better). >>> I used --proxy-base/proxy_base CherryPy calls it "tools.proxy.base" >>> internally. >>> >>> Looking at various CMSs (Graffiti, Joomla, Mambo, etc.) and blog >>> software packages, I see that they call it "base URL" (or some minor >>> variation thereof). I found a few that called it "proxy URL" (very few). >>> >>> As such, would --proxy-base-url/proxy_base_url suffice? >> Admittedly, I'm not terribly familiar with this world, but the word "proxy" >> in any of it seems a bit strange to me. I would simply drop that portion >> from the lingo, leaving --base-url/base_url. But perhaps having "proxy" >> makes more sense in this context than not having it. > > It actually was very intentional, since using the parameters set > CherryPy's tools.proxy.on: True. This parameter should only be used > with a proxy.
After thinking about this more, it should still be sufficient to have --base-url/base_url and just explain that it's only intended for use with a proxy in the man page. Thoughts? -- Shawn Walker _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
