Sriram Natarajan wrote: > > > So, are you reviving the proposal of adding a and/or renaming to conf.d? > > For now, if we can add conf.d that would be a good start. In the long > run, I would like to see 'extra' go away.
So if both are there, /etc/apache2/extra/ contains *.conf files that are included in the distribution and /etc/apache2/conf.d/ ships empty but is documented as a place for additional *.conf files added by the user? Are these two classes of conf files so different that they require different locations? Could you expand on the reasoning of the proposal? I agree conf.d is more common. AFAIK the only reason against it is that it's not what was there before - but that is a powerful argument. We need a compelling argument to drive change. If conf.d is universal except for Solaris, let's document that. (I see it's conf.d on my debian server, but I haven't surveyed all other distros.) -- Jyri J. Virkki - jyri.virkki at sun.com - Sun Microsystems
