[CentOS-docs] Access request to page TipsAndTricks/ApacheVhostDir

2012-07-11 Thread Brian Mathis
Requesting access to edit page TipsAndTricks/ApacheVhostDir

Looking to make some small edits for clarity.

❧ Brian Mathis
___
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs


Re: [CentOS-docs] Access request to page TipsAndTricks/ApacheVhostDir

2012-07-11 Thread Ed Heron
On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 10:42 -0400, Brian Mathis wrote:
 Requesting access to edit page TipsAndTricks/ApacheVhostDir
 
 Looking to make some small edits for clarity.
 
 ❧ Brian Mathis

  Yay, somebody read it!

  What are you suggesting?


___
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs


Re: [CentOS-docs] Access request to page TipsAndTricks/ApacheVhostDir

2012-07-11 Thread Brian Mathis
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 11:26 AM, Ed Heron e...@heron-ent.com wrote:
 On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 10:42 -0400, Brian Mathis wrote:
 Requesting access to edit page TipsAndTricks/ApacheVhostDir

 Looking to make some small edits for clarity.

 ❧ Brian Mathis

   Yay, somebody read it!

   What are you suggesting?


The use of mv -v ...{,_} is too clever for this kind of educational
document, and should be changed to spell out the full mv command.  I
get what you're doing there, but the purpose of the document is not to
teach clever uses of bash, it's to make it obvious to people that
you're renaming the file.  It will trip up the flow of reading for all
but the most knowledgeable users, and users who don't understand it
will be totally lost.

In most documents and scripts, I usually spell out the short form
options as well, such as using --verbose.  Short forms save you
typing, but documentation should not trip people up if they don't know
what the option means.

Also, I find the use of _ to be obtuse and highly error prone if one
were to actually run a server that way.  It's far more obvious to use
disabled, which makes it very clear that those items are disabled.
It may work for you but only because that's a convention you came up
with so you're used to it, but we're not in dos 8.3 days with
filenames, so why not be more descriptive?

In section 6.4, is there a reason not to make a vhosts.conf file
that contains the Include in the in the conf.d/ directory, instead
of appending to the httpd.conf, or do you run into ordering issues
there?  I try to avoid changing the distro files if possible.


❧ Brian Mathis
___
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs