You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I'm aware of this, but not sure about 2.2 vs 2.4 usage. From my pov (no backed up numbers), 2.2 is much more commonly seen.
Is adding this breaking note under the repo description a good idea?
I didn't see the note about 2.4 in the README until after I forked the repo and added sections for 2.4 and 2.2. Not sure if you would want this added or not but since I wrapped it up I thought I could pass it along: https://github.com/msumpter/htaccess
2.2 is much more common, but 2.4 is the default Apache install on RHEL/CentOS 7 and Ubuntu 14.04 and eventually these docs will need to be updated to handle both as 2.4 grows in usage.
2.2 is much more common, but 2.4 is the default Apache install on RHEL/CentOS 7 and Ubuntu 14.04 and eventually these docs will need to be updated to handle both as 2.4 grows in usage.
But splitting 2.2 and 2.4 config into different sections can make the README look fragmented. Should we make use of comments instead?
## Apache 2.2Order deny, allow
Denyfrom all
Allowfrom xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
## Apache 2.4# Require all denied# Require ip xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
But splitting 2.2 and 2.4 config into different sections can make the README look fragmented.
I agree. I feel nobody will need both at the same time, so ideally instead of fragmenting this document its better to have a separate one. This and general instructions on which document to look in for your version makes more sense imho.
But splitting 2.2 and 2.4 config into different sections can make the
README look fragmented.
I feel nobody will need both at the same time, so ideally instead of
fragmenting this document its better to have a separate one. This and
general instructions on which document to look in for your version makes
more sense imho.
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub #2 (comment).
For the authorization, this snippet can be used to handle both Apache 2.2 and 2.4
<IfModuleauthz_core_module>
Require all denied
</IfModule>
<IfModule!authz_core_module>
Denyfrom all
</IfModule>
But I think that if this repo's target public is the github users, and not you (@phanan), you should add snippets to both versions of apache. Since that's your repo, maybe you want to have only snippets that help you (not judging 😄)
Since that's your repo, maybe you want to have only snippets that help you
Well if this was true, I would just write the "force www" snippet somewhere and stick to it, since it's like the only thing I really ever need...
Now while your snippet may work (I've not tested it), it's kinda redundant I'm afraid. A web master should always know his Apache version thus only needs the respective config.
@a1ee9b Won't this clutter the repo up too? Also, we may end up with redundant info having several files.
I'd love to follow the model of Front-end Job Interview Questions instead -- information is right there when you need it. Guess I'll stick with comments for now. Would be great if @msumpter and @JudeRosario could update the PRs accordingly. Thanks so much!
Sorry I'm late back into this thread, I agree completely about breaking up the README too much with sub sections. Comments probably are the best way to go for clarity.
Activity
phanan commentedon Feb 9, 2015
I'm aware of this, but not sure about 2.2 vs 2.4 usage. From my pov (no backed up numbers), 2.2 is much more commonly seen.
Is adding this breaking note under the repo description a good idea?
a1ee9b commentedon Feb 9, 2015
A link to the changes page is probably a good idea. Took me some time to see that they made breaking changes in a minor version step...
Added a 2.2 to 2.4 breaking changes note, following #2
phanan commentedon Feb 9, 2015
Added it, thanks!
msumpter commentedon Feb 9, 2015
I didn't see the note about 2.4 in the README until after I forked the repo and added sections for 2.4 and 2.2. Not sure if you would want this added or not but since I wrapped it up I thought I could pass it along:
https://github.com/msumpter/htaccess
2.2 is much more common, but 2.4 is the default Apache install on RHEL/CentOS 7 and Ubuntu 14.04 and eventually these docs will need to be updated to handle both as 2.4 grows in usage.
phanan commentedon Feb 10, 2015
Thanks. I totally agree on what you said:
But splitting 2.2 and 2.4 config into different sections can make the README look fragmented. Should we make use of comments instead?
JudeRosario commentedon Feb 10, 2015
I agree. I feel nobody will need both at the same time, so ideally instead of fragmenting this document its better to have a separate one. This and general instructions on which document to look in for your version makes more sense imho.
phanan commentedon Feb 10, 2015
Then this time the repo itself would be cluttered. Also, not every section
is applicable/necessary to be on both documents.
On Tuesday, February 10, 2015, Jude Rosario notifications@github.com
wrote:
JudeRosario commentedon Feb 10, 2015
Agreed, I guess its your call on how to take this project forward. My earlier PR had 2 sections for 2.2 and 2.4 separately
a1ee9b commentedon Feb 10, 2015
I think the best solution would be to add two example .htaccess files to the repo, containing all the source commented out.
I.e.:
.htacces.2.2:
.htaccess.2.4:
The explanation in the README is probably applicable to both of them.
filhocodes commentedon Feb 10, 2015
For the authorization, this snippet can be used to handle both Apache 2.2 and 2.4
But I think that if this repo's target public is the github users, and not you (@phanan), you should add snippets to both versions of apache. Since that's your repo, maybe you want to have only snippets that help you (not judging 😄)
phanan commentedon Feb 10, 2015
Well if this was true, I would just write the "force www" snippet somewhere and stick to it, since it's like the only thing I really ever need...
Now while your snippet may work (I've not tested it), it's kinda redundant I'm afraid. A web master should always know his Apache version thus only needs the respective config.
@a1ee9b Won't this clutter the repo up too? Also, we may end up with redundant info having several files.
I'd love to follow the model of Front-end Job Interview Questions instead -- information is right there when you need it. Guess I'll stick with comments for now. Would be great if @msumpter and @JudeRosario could update the PRs accordingly. Thanks so much!
Inline comments as suggested by @phanan in phanan#2
msumpter commentedon Feb 11, 2015
Sorry I'm late back into this thread, I agree completely about breaking up the README too much with sub sections. Comments probably are the best way to go for clarity.
lorepozo commentedon Feb 13, 2015
You could have a 2.4 branch and a 2.2 branch, remove the master branch, and make 2.2 the default.
More precise source link for trailing slash removal rule phanan#2
More precise source link for trailing slash removal rule phanan#2
vlakoff commentedon Apr 9, 2015
automatic recognition of #<digits>… sorry!
Merge pull request #64 from vlakoff/trailing-slash