https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52000
Filipus Klutiero changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEEDINFO|NEW
--- Comment #9 from Filipus
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52181
--- Comment #10 from Filipus Klutiero 2012-04-11 21:18:45
UTC ---
I said "we start with some string (presumably a URI)", but in fact, the
parenthesis is wrong, as explained in
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/trunk/en/mod/mod_rewrite.html#rewr
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52181
--- Comment #9 from Filipus Klutiero 2012-04-11 21:06:47
UTC ---
I tend to agree with André. The more I read about mod_rewrite, the more I think
it's really complicated. It's no wonder why the documentation has several
issues, this is just
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52181
--- Comment #8 from Filipus Klutiero 2012-04-11 20:55:40
UTC ---
Thank you again Daniel.
The addition of "RewriteRules?" does solve point 1.
As for "Redirect or proxy the contents", I think this does improve the accuracy
of the overall p
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52000
Daniel Gruno changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |NEEDINFO
--- Comment #8 from Daniel
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52000
Filipus Klutiero changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEEDINFO|NEW
--- Comment #7 from Filipus
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52181
--- Comment #7 from Daniel Gruno 2012-04-11 19:25:46 UTC
---
Whoa now, let's not get _that_ complicated with a chart meant to clarify, not
further complicate things ;). I appreciate the comments, but it seems to be a
bit much for my brain
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52181
--- Comment #6 from André Malo 2012-04-11 19:06:55 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Created attachment 28586 [details]
> Updated (again) rewrite chart
>
> I have made another attempt at capturing what you mean. I have added some
> condit
On 11 Apr 2012, at 09:15, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> As per our nifty little STATUS document, it came to my attention that we were
> missing an introductory segment on how to develop simple modules for httpd
> 2.4, so I took the liberty of drawing up a proposal for what we could put in
> place for t
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52181
--- Comment #5 from Daniel Gruno 2012-04-11 18:51:18 UTC
---
Created attachment 28586
--> https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28586
Updated (again) rewrite chart
I have made another attempt at capturing what you mean. I
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53054
Filipus Klutiero changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEEDINFO|RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52000
Daniel Gruno changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|NEEDINFO
--- Comment #6 from Daniel
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51958
Igor Galić changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
> I plan to expand on the subject, probably add another 10 pages or so,
> during the summer, as well as letting it into the 2.4 fold, provided
> I
> get positive feedback from this mailing list.
I think dev@ -- and modules-dev@ are the righter lists to
get the kind of feedback you wish for.
We mi
Hello all httpd document lovers,
As per our nifty little STATUS document, it came to my attention that we
were missing an introductory segment on how to develop simple modules
for httpd 2.4, so I took the liberty of drawing up a proposal for what
we could put in place for this request. The draft is
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53054
Daniel Gruno changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |NEEDINFO
--- Comment #5 from Daniel
16 matches
Mail list logo
