* [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Unless anyone strenuously objects, I'm adding back the comments
> regarding ScriptInterpreterSource. We're getting an increasing number of
> questions about this.
I'm -0 on it, because using ScriptInterpretersource registry without further
explanation of the flaws is dangerous. Using ScriptInterpreterSource
registry-strict without knowing what it does is silly.
However, let us document it better and just refer to the docs, if at all.
Second objection is: The httpd.conf may not become a doc replacement. It
disturbes me a bit, that (a) people get such a big default config which gives
wrong impressions about how to use the apache. ("complex", <IfModule over all
and everywhere etc.).
YMMV. nd
