Re: Suggested addition to the httpd v2.4 Upgrading page

2013-05-23 Thread Eric Covener
ld be mentioned in the upgrading to 2.4 page. > > > > Here is a suggested patch for: > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/upgrading.xml > and > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/docs/manual/up

Suggested addition to the httpd v2.4 Upgrading page

2013-05-23 Thread Timmins, Sean - Chichester
Resending with file attached as oppose to in the body. Since RewriteLog and RewriteLogLevel were removed as valid configuration directives in v2.4, this should be mentioned in the upgrading to 2.4 page. Here is a suggested patch for: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk/docs

Suggested addition to the httpd v2.4 Upgrading page

2013-02-04 Thread Timmins, Sean - Chichester
Since RewriteLog and RewriteLogLevel were removed as valid configuration directives in v2.4, this should probably be mentioned in the upgrading to 2.4 page. Here is a suggested patch for: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/upgrading.xml Index: manual/upgrading.xml

Re: upgrading

2003-07-25 Thread Michael . Schroepl
Listen +directive) to test for any incompatibilities before doing the +final upgrade. maybe add to this sentence that these Apaches could then even run in parallel on the same machine without conflicting with each other. (Which might not be true in case the configuration spends

Re: upgrading

2003-07-25 Thread Erik Abele
+1, Joshua, I like it; much better than the first version, IMHO. Though, I suscpect there will be a rewrite necessary when it's finally decided if and where to copy config.nice :-() Cheers, Erik On 25/07/2003, at 04:58, Joshua Slive wrote: Incorporating very helpful suggestions from Michael, Mads,

Re: upgrading

2003-07-25 Thread Joshua Slive
anual/install.xml,v retrieving revision 1.20 diff -u -r1.20 install.xml --- install.xml 27 Jun 2003 18:53:03 - 1.20 +++ install.xml 25 Jul 2003 14:58:13 - @@ -21,6 +21,10 @@ to create an environment that looks like many other Open Source projects. +If you are upgrading fro

Re: upgrading

2003-07-25 Thread Michael . Schroepl
>> Here's a patch to install.xml to deal with upgrading. Feedback welcome. > Can we really be sure that all upgrades will be that smooth? I know that > people try their best to make it so, but there could still be bigger > changes even in 2.0.x and definetely in 2.1.x. T

Re: upgrading

2003-07-24 Thread Joshua Slive
On Thu, 24 Jul 2003, Mads Toftum wrote: > On Thu, Jul 24, 2003 at 03:26:56PM -0400, Joshua Slive wrote: > > Here's a patch to install.xml to deal with upgrading. Feedback welcome. > > > Maybe suggest that people read CHANGES first? > Can we really be sure that all up

Re: upgrading

2003-07-24 Thread Erik Abele
comments inline... On 24/07/2003, at 09:26, Joshua Slive wrote: Here's a patch to install.xml to deal with upgrading. Feedback welcome. Index: install.xml === RCS file: /home/cvs/httpd-2.0/docs/manual/install.xml,v retri

Re: upgrading

2003-07-24 Thread Mads Toftum
On Thu, Jul 24, 2003 at 03:26:56PM -0400, Joshua Slive wrote: > Here's a patch to install.xml to deal with upgrading. Feedback welcome. > Maybe suggest that people read CHANGES first? Can we really be sure that all upgrades will be that smooth? I know that people try their best to

upgrading

2003-07-24 Thread Joshua Slive
Here's a patch to install.xml to deal with upgrading. Feedback welcome. Index: install.xml === RCS file: /home/cvs/httpd-2.0/docs/manual/install.xml,v retrieving revision 1.20 diff -u -r1.20 install.xml --- install.xml 27 Jun