Re: [web2py] Re: routes.py vs mod_rewrite

2012-07-11 Thread Jonathan Lundell 
On 11 Jul 2012, at 1:19 AM, Athelionas wrote:
> Than I'll go with routes.py. It's much easier than mod_rewrite and also 100% 
> portable which is a killer feature.

There's also no reason you can't use both. Go with routes.py and add an Apache 
rewrite if you want to speed up static accesses. There are examples in the 
scripts directory.

> Thanks for the responses.
> 
> 2012. július 10., kedd 23:51:54 UTC+2 időpontban Athelionas a következőt írta:
> What is the preferred way of rewriting URLs?
> Also, are there any advantages or disadvantages of choosing one over the 
> other?
> 
> I like the idea of routes.py better because of portability, but is it any 
> good in case of static files?

[web2py] Re: routes.py vs mod_rewrite

2012-07-11 Thread Athelionas 
Than I'll go with routes.py. It's much easier than mod_rewrite and also 
100% portable which is a killer feature.
Thanks for the responses.

2012. július 10., kedd 23:51:54 UTC+2 időpontban Athelionas a következőt 
írta:
>
> What is the preferred way of rewriting URLs?
> Also, are there any advantages or disadvantages of choosing one over the 
> other?
>
> I like the idea of routes.py better because of portability, but is it any 
> good in case of static files?
>

Re: [web2py] Re: routes.py vs mod_rewrite

2012-07-10 Thread Jonathan Lundell 
On 10 Jul 2012, at 4:49 PM, Anthony wrote:
> routes.py will also handle rewriting outgoing URLs via the URL() function.

And by default, the parametric router doesn't shorten static URLs, so as to 
make them easier to handle via Apache's mod_rewrite or the like.

> 
> Anthony
> 
> On Tuesday, July 10, 2012 5:51:54 PM UTC-4, Athelionas wrote:
> What is the preferred way of rewriting URLs?
> Also, are there any advantages or disadvantages of choosing one over the 
> other?
> 
> I like the idea of routes.py better because of portability, but is it any 
> good in case of static files?

[web2py] Re: routes.py vs mod_rewrite

2012-07-10 Thread Anthony 
routes.py will also handle rewriting outgoing URLs via the URL() function.

Anthony

On Tuesday, July 10, 2012 5:51:54 PM UTC-4, Athelionas wrote:
>
> What is the preferred way of rewriting URLs?
> Also, are there any advantages or disadvantages of choosing one over the 
> other?
>
> I like the idea of routes.py better because of portability, but is it any 
> good in case of static files?
>

[web2py] Re: routes.py vs mod_rewrite

2012-07-10 Thread G. Clifford Williams 
personally I always go with routes.py

On Tuesday, July 10, 2012 4:51:54 PM UTC-5, Athelionas wrote:
>
> What is the preferred way of rewriting URLs?
> Also, are there any advantages or disadvantages of choosing one over the 
> other?
>
> I like the idea of routes.py better because of portability, but is it any 
> good in case of static files?
>

[web2py] Re: routes.py vs mod_rewrite

2012-07-10 Thread Massimo Di Pierro 
routes.py works for all web2py urls, including static files.


On Tuesday, 10 July 2012 16:51:54 UTC-5, Athelionas wrote:
>
> What is the preferred way of rewriting URLs?
> Also, are there any advantages or disadvantages of choosing one over the 
> other?
>
> I like the idea of routes.py better because of portability, but is it any 
> good in case of static files?
>