> There is zero reason for us to avoid putting deflate into the default > configuration.
Sorry. There ARE (good) reasons to avoid doing so. I'm the one who wrote the FIRST mod_gzip module for Apache 1.x series so you would think I'd be a strong advocate of 'auto-enablement' by default, but I am NOT. There is HOMEWORK involved here and most users will get into deep tapioca unless they understand all the (ongoing) issues. > it is also very arguable that we should leave it off. Yes, it is. > I think others have argued well to enable it by default. Disagree. I haven't seen the 'good' argument for 'auto-enablement' yet. Some of the reasons to NOT 'go there' are coming out in other similar threads right now... Here's a clip from the (concurrent) message thread entitled... 'Canned deflate conf in manual - time to drop the NS4/Vary' [snip] Don't forget the ongoing issue that if you ONLY vary on 'Accept-Encoding' then almost ALL browsers will then refuse to cache a response entity LOCALLY and the pain factor moves directly to the Proxy/Content Server(s). If you vary on 'User-Agent' ( No longer reasonable because of the abuse of that header 'out there'? ) then the browsers WILL cache responses locally and the pain is reduced at the Proxy/Content server level, but pie is not free at a truck stop and there are then OTHER issues to deal with. The OTHER 'ongoing issue' regarding compression is that, to this day, it still ONLY works for a limited set of MIME types. The 'Accept-Encoding: gzip,deflate' header coming from ALL major browser is still mostly a LIE. It would seem to indicate that the MIME type doesn't matter and it will 'decode' for ANY MIME type but nothing could be further from the truth. There is no browser on the planet that will 'Accept-Encoding' for ANY/ALL mime type(s). If you are going to turn compression ON by default, without the user having to make any decisions for their particular environment, then part of the decision for the default config has to be 'Which MIME types?' text/plain and/or text/html only? SOME browsers can 'Accept-Encoding' on the ever-increasing .js Javascript backloads but some CANNOT. These 2 issues alone are probably enough to justify keeping compression OFF by default. A lot of people that use Apache won't even be able to get their heads around either one of these 'issues' and they really SHOULD do a little homework before turning it ON. Someone already quoted that... 'people expect the default config to just WORK without major issues'. That's exactly what you have now. It's not 'broken'. Why change it? Kevin Kiley [snip] -----Original Message----- From: Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> To: dev@httpd.apache.org Sent: Tue, Jun 1, 2010 7:40 am Subject: Re: Fast by default Geez, Eric. No wonder people don't want to contribute to httpd, when they run into an attitude like yours. That dismissiveness makes me embarressed for our community. There is zero reason for us to avoid putting deflate into the default configuration. It is also very arguable that we should leave it off. I think others have argued well to enable it by default, while you've simply dismissed them with your holier-than-thou attitude and lack of any solid rationale. -g On May 31, 2010 8:06 PM, "Eric Covener" <cove...@gmail.com> wrote: On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 8:30 PM, Bryan McQuade <bmcqu...@google.com> wrote: > I propose providing an... An additional httpd.conf doesn't sound valuable to me. What slice of non-savvy users would scrutinize an alternate config file, can replace the config file of their webserver, isn't using a webserver packaged by their OS, and wouldn't have just gotten the same information today from the manual and 400,000 other websites? There's currently no <ifModule> bloat in the default conf, but you're welcome to submit a patch that adds one for deflate or expires (latter seems more unwise to me). See the "supplemental configuration" section of the generated config. This doesn't address mass-vhost companies failing to allow deflate because it's not in the no-args HTTPD ./configure , which sounds far-fetched to me. I can't recall a users@ or #httpd user implying being subjected to such a thing with their own build or with cheap hosting. -- Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com
