Re: svn commit: r1132802 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual: mod/mod_setenvif.xml rewrite/access.xml rewrite/intro.xml rewrite/rewritemap.xml ssl/ssl_faq.xml ssl/ssl_howto.xml vhosts/examples.xml
On Thursday 09 June 2011, Ruediger Pluem wrote: > On 06/07/2011 12:09 AM, s...@apache.org wrote: > > Author: sf > > Date: Mon Jun 6 22:09:22 2011 > > New Revision: 1132802 > > > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1132802&view=rev > > Log: > > purge some useless uses of '.*' > > > > Modified: > > httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/mod/mod_setenvif.xml > > httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/rewrite/access.xml > > httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/rewrite/intro.xml > > httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/rewrite/rewritemap.xml > > httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/ssl/ssl_faq.xml > > httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/ssl/ssl_howto.xml > > httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/vhosts/examples.xml > > -RewriteRule .* - [F] > > +RewriteRule . - [F] > > Can we have empty URLs? If yes the above change changes the result > of rule for those. No, I don't think so. But I could change the regexp to ^ if you want. > > # Allow Network Access and/or Basic Auth > > Satisfy any > > > > Modified: httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/vhosts/examples.xml > > URL: > > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/vhost > > s/examples.xml?rev=1132802&r1=1132801&r2=1132802&view=diff > > > > == --- > > httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/vhosts/examples.xml (original) +++ > > httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/vhosts/examples.xml Mon Jun 6 > > 22:09:22 2011 @@ -562,7 +562,7 @@ > > > > # primary vhost > > DocumentRoot /www/subdomain > > RewriteEngine On > > > > -RewriteRule ^/.* /www/subdomain/index.html > > +RewriteRule . /www/subdomain/index.html > > Can we have URLs not starting with /? If yes the above change > changes the result of rule for those. Not in server-context (which this example is about). But since I think we can have URLs not starting with / in directory context, maybe I should change that back to "^/".
Re: svn commit: r1132802 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual: mod/mod_setenvif.xml rewrite/access.xml rewrite/intro.xml rewrite/rewritemap.xml ssl/ssl_faq.xml ssl/ssl_howto.xml vhosts/examples.xml
On 06/07/2011 12:09 AM, s...@apache.org wrote:
> Author: sf
> Date: Mon Jun 6 22:09:22 2011
> New Revision: 1132802
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1132802&view=rev
> Log:
> purge some useless uses of '.*'
>
> Modified:
> httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/mod/mod_setenvif.xml
> httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/rewrite/access.xml
> httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/rewrite/intro.xml
> httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/rewrite/rewritemap.xml
> httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/ssl/ssl_faq.xml
> httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/ssl/ssl_howto.xml
> httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/vhosts/examples.xml
>
> Modified: httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/rewrite/intro.xml
> URL:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/rewrite/intro.xml?rev=1132802&r1=1132801&r2=1132802&view=diff
> ==
> --- httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/rewrite/intro.xml (original)
> +++ httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/rewrite/intro.xml Mon Jun 6 22:09:22 2011
> @@ -186,7 +186,7 @@ the beginning of a query string).
> A full filesystem path to a resource
>
>
> -RewriteRule ^/games.* /usr/local/games/web
> +RewriteRule ^/games /usr/local/games/web
>
> This maps a request to an arbitrary location on your filesystem, much
> like the Alias directive.
> @@ -282,7 +282,7 @@ the word "go", you could use:
>
> RewriteCond %{QUERY_STRING} hack
> RewriteCond %{HTTP_COOKIE} !go
> -RewriteRule .* - [F]
> +RewriteRule . - [F]
Can we have empty URLs? If yes the above change changes the result of rule for
those.
>
> Notice that the exclamation mark specifies a negative match, so the rule
> is only applied if the cookie does not contain "go".
>
>
> Modified: httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/ssl/ssl_howto.xml
> URL:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/ssl/ssl_howto.xml?rev=1132802&r1=1132801&r2=1132802&view=diff
> ==
> --- httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/ssl/ssl_howto.xml (original)
> +++ httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/ssl/ssl_howto.xml Mon Jun 6 22:09:22 2011
> @@ -260,7 +260,7 @@ SSLRequire %{SSL_CIPHER_USEKEY
> RewriteEngineon
> RewriteCond %{REMOTE_ADDR} !^192\.168\.1\.[0-9]+$
> RewriteCond %{HTTPS} !=on
> -RewriteRule .* - [F]
> +RewriteRule . - [F]
Can we have empty URLs? If yes the above change changes the result of rule for
those.
>
> # Allow Network Access and/or Basic Auth
> Satisfy any
>
> Modified: httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/vhosts/examples.xml
> URL:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/vhosts/examples.xml?rev=1132802&r1=1132801&r2=1132802&view=diff
> ==
> --- httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/vhosts/examples.xml (original)
> +++ httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/vhosts/examples.xml Mon Jun 6 22:09:22 2011
> @@ -562,7 +562,7 @@
> # primary vhost
> DocumentRoot /www/subdomain
> RewriteEngine On
> -RewriteRule ^/.* /www/subdomain/index.html
> +RewriteRule . /www/subdomain/index.html
Can we have URLs not starting with /? If yes the above change changes the
result of rule for those.
Regards
Rüdiger
Re: Apache janitor ?
On June 8, 2011 20:11 , Igor =?utf-8?Q?Gali=C4=87?= wrote: One of the many good suggestions they propose is to have a "Patch Manager" - someone who makes sure that patches submitted via Bugzilla or directly to the list don't get lost in the noise and that people get some feedback, even if it's just a one liner like "Thanks, we're looking into this", "Nope, that's really not in our scope", etc... Committers, is there anything that list/community members could do to pitch in and help? What, if anything, would be useful and accepted? For example, is there a list of things you'd like to be done before you commit a patch, and are there parts of that list that could be delegated to one or more non-committer janitors? I'd be willing to try and help (for example), if such help would be useful. Big thanks to Igor for his message, his suggestions, and recommending the "Open Source Projects and Poisonous People" talk. What Igor says has been bothering me for a while, too. -- Mark Montague m...@catseye.org
Re: mod_lua Filter Hook?
I write a module named mod_luaex, it work with mod_lua, and extend lua functions that support mod_dbd,mod_session and filter. Mod_lua will not do big enhance and update according to mod_lua's author message three month ago. 2011/6/9 Joachim Zobel > Hi. > > Will the mod_lua filter hook be implemented in the near future? I am > aware that this requires wrapping buckets and brigades, which is a lot > of work. Are there any plans for generated API wrappers as mod_perl has > them? > > Sincerely, > Joachim > > >
Re: Apache janitor ?
Christophe's mail reminds me a bit of Brian Fitzpatrick and Ben Collins-Sussman's talk "Open Source Projects and Poisonous People" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-F-3E8pyjFo One of the many good suggestions they propose is to have a "Patch Manager" - someone who makes sure that patches submitted via Bugzilla or directly to the list don't get lost in the noise and that people get some feedback, even if it's just a one liner like "Thanks, we're looking into this", "Nope, that's really not in our scope", etc... I've watched this talk three or four times by now, and every time motivates me to look into our bug tracker. The overwhelming number of (currently) 1133 open issues, however soon dampens my enthusiasm. http://s.apache.org/a2open http://s.apache.org/a2patchavail (184 right now) I've been thinking for some time now that we really need a hackathlon or bug-squashing event to drastically reduce those. Or at least clean out the invalid ones. The ones which have already been (accidentally) fixed, etc.. i -- Igor Galić Tel: +43 (0) 664 886 22 883 Mail: i.ga...@brainsware.org URL: http://brainsware.org/
Re: Apache janitor ?
- Original Message -
> Hi,
>
> from time to time I prepare small patches to improve apache code
> source
> quality.
> These patches can be small speed up, removal of duplicated code,
> clean-up,
> formatting... But no functionnal change as I'm not an apache guru
> yet.
> This is more or less like what is done by the kernel janitors for
> linux.
>
> Once I'd been told to use the apache bugzilla database to submit
> these
> patches, but, I'm not sure that this is the best place.
>
> Patches like the following one are, IMO, a good thing. It improves
> readability of the source code, reduce number of lines, reduce
> potential
> mistakes... But bugzilla is not dedicated for this kind of patch.
I'd create it as 'enhancement'. Attach the patch, label it as PatchAvailable
and then bug people here to commit it. Preferably with a subject:
[PATCH]
>
> Index: modules/filters/mod_include.c
> ===
> --- modules/filters/mod_include.c (revision 1132846)
> +++ modules/filters/mod_include.c (working copy)
> @@ -3230,10 +3217,7 @@
> char *sp = intern->current_arg->name;
>
> /* normalize the name */
> -while (*sp) {
> -*sp = apr_tolower(*sp);
> -++sp;
> -}
> +ap_str_tolower(sp);
> }
>
> intern->state = PARSE_ARG_EQ;
>
>
>
> So I was wondering if 'comp.apache.devel' could be the right place ?
> Or maybe a new dedicated forum could be created, for example
> 'comp.apache.janitor' ?
I don't think that creating yet another forum makes sense.
> Or maybe patches could be sent directly to main developpers of apache
> for
> approval or refusal ?
This forum (dev@httpd.apache.org) is where main Apache httpd developers
hang out and discuss.
> On the other side, do you think that this kind of patch are usefull
> and
> worse submitting ?
That's not the question here. The question is if you think it's worth.
> Thanks for your comments.
>
> CJ
i
--
Igor Galić
Tel: +43 (0) 664 886 22 883
Mail: i.ga...@brainsware.org
URL: http://brainsware.org/
Apache janitor ?
Hi,
from time to time I prepare small patches to improve apache code source
quality.
These patches can be small speed up, removal of duplicated code, clean-up,
formatting... But no functionnal change as I'm not an apache guru yet.
This is more or less like what is done by the kernel janitors for linux.
Once I'd been told to use the apache bugzilla database to submit these
patches, but, I'm not sure that this is the best place.
Patches like the following one are, IMO, a good thing. It improves
readability of the source code, reduce number of lines, reduce potential
mistakes... But bugzilla is not dedicated for this kind of patch.
Index: modules/filters/mod_include.c
===
--- modules/filters/mod_include.c (revision 1132846)
+++ modules/filters/mod_include.c (working copy)
@@ -3230,10 +3217,7 @@
char *sp = intern->current_arg->name;
/* normalize the name */
-while (*sp) {
-*sp = apr_tolower(*sp);
-++sp;
-}
+ap_str_tolower(sp);
}
intern->state = PARSE_ARG_EQ;
So I was wondering if 'comp.apache.devel' could be the right place ?
Or maybe a new dedicated forum could be created, for example
'comp.apache.janitor' ?
Or maybe patches could be sent directly to main developpers of apache for
approval or refusal ?
On the other side, do you think that this kind of patch are usefull and
worse submitting ?
Thanks for your comments.
CJ
mod_lua Filter Hook?
Hi. Will the mod_lua filter hook be implemented in the near future? I am aware that this requires wrapping buckets and brigades, which is a lot of work. Are there any plans for generated API wrappers as mod_perl has them? Sincerely, Joachim
mod-vhost-ldap contributed as part of httpd
Hi, I think I have mentioned this before, but the Catacomb has reminded me that I got no reply. I would be happy to contribute mod-vhost-ldap as part of httpd trunk and take care of the module as part of httpd. Since the module is just 788 lines long and it's licensed under Apache Licence 2.0, I don't think it deserves the incubation process. It's more like a patch for current httpd. If there is interest I'll prepare the module for inclusion to trunk and send a patch to bugzilla. The homepage is here: http://modvhostldap.alioth.debian.org/ (it includes links to git repository) O. -- Ondřej Surý
