On Mon, 16 May 2011, MindTooth wrote:
Hello,
I have sent an email on the before, but got no reply.
Please, make sure the site is accessible from both no-www and www.
Personally I prefer the no-www.
This has been discussed recently[1] and several months ago[2]. As far
as I can tell, there's no good reason for the decision. The only
argument in favor of "shouldn't respond to bare vim.org" was a response
from the DNS administrator that was reposted on-list[3]:
On 08/17/2010 03:25 PM, Stefan `Sec` Zehl wrote:
Yes. This is by design. Its a bad habit to omit the "www." part if you
intend to talk to a webserver. Maybe call me an old fart, but you are
connecting to a webserver, not a domain, and the URL you use should
reflect that.
CU,
Sec
(to which I responded, much later and in jest, that he was an old fart[4]).
Sourceforge (which hosts www.vim.org) has a preferred mechanism for
serving bare domains[5], which Ben S (per John's prompting) pointed out
in the recent vim-dev thread[6].
It's unclear what remains to be said or needs to be done for this to
happen.
--
Best,
Ben
[1] http://groups.google.com/group/vim_use/browse_thread/thread/9cb3714feed89eb7
, http://groups.google.com/group/vim_dev/browse_thread/thread/b724d3968c0d839b
[2] http://groups.google.com/group/vim_dev/browse_thread/thread/36b81acf60548c20
[3] http://groups.google.com/group/vim_dev/msg/e446b98902b04bde
[4] http://groups.google.com/group/vim_use/msg/d9e1ce19939ae9ad
[5] http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/sourceforge/wiki/Custom%20VHOSTs
[6] http://groups.google.com/group/vim_dev/msg/dd8d2149cf421cd7
--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
