Bill Stoddard wrote:
My not so well formed thoughts are that if a module claims it should handle a request based on a SetHandler directive in a Location directive, the server should not allow that handler to DECLINE the request. Putting it another way, if the handler claims the request then DECLINEs, the server should prevent other handlers from attempting to serve the request.
I've brought this up before, but if you shortcut translation, how do you handle cases where r->handler is set after translation/map_to_storage.
I'd rather keep it simple and not change how those cases are processed.
that is, just because at the start of a request <Location /foo> refers to a non-static resource, doesn't mean that assumption won't change.
<Location /foo> wasn't intended to be used for static files. See http://httpd.apache.org/docs-2.0/mod/core.html#location. If somebody wants to do something that strange, they can write their own map_to_storage function.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A map_to_storage hook needs to know when to allow the directory walk and when not to.
I think I see what you mean. so, perhaps the answer to my question above is that, with your patch, if modules expect to set r->handler under certain conditions, then they ought to install their own map_to_storage handler to handle those conditions as well?
yeah, that's my take. If the module is sophisticated enough to know when to set r->handler without the core's help, I would assume it's sophisticated enough to have a custom map_to_storage function which knows when it is appropriate to alter normal processing.
Greg
