From: "Ryan Bloom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2002 11:34 PM
> I would like to discuss the reasoning behind this change. Why are we trying
> to overload the meaning of DocumentRoot this way?
Because it allows the DocumentRoot to be, well, nonexistant.
It allows us to have the following section;
<Location /nowhere>
DocumentRoot unset
</Location>
that makes it 100% clear where nowhere goes. It is also possibly easier
than alias, since
<Location /private>
DocumentRoot /some/private/resource
Options deny,allow
Allow from only.me
</Location>
works the same as
Alias /private /some/private/resource
<Location /private>
Options deny,allow
Allow from only.me
</Location>
but the former is very explicit.
That was the reasoning, at least, for the suggestion in STATUS.
It would allow us to transition to a more flexible schema, where <Location >s
are mounted to the filesystem, or JK space, or some other mechanism for serving
content. And it certainly neither breaks the existing DocumentRoot, nor the
Alias directive [which will still, as always, override DocumentRoot.)
Bill
