I think it's well established by now that freedombox will run a web server.
I'm keen to start getting things up and running, even if it's only
something as small as a web presence running under debian, maybe with
an FB badge.
Do we have a preference, apache or nginx or user choice? Bear in mind
On Tue, 2 Aug 2011 18:40:39 +0200, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
I think it's well established by now that freedombox will run a web
server.
I'm keen to start getting things up and running, even if it's only
something as small as a web presence running under debian, maybe with
an FB badge.
Do we have
On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 18:40 +0200, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
> I think it's well established by now that freedombox will run a web server.
>
> I'm keen to start getting things up and running, even if it's only
> something as small as a web presence running under debian, maybe with
> an FB badge.
>
>
On 2 August 2011 18:51, Ted Smith wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 18:40 +0200, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
>> I think it's well established by now that freedombox will run a web server.
>>
>> I'm keen to start getting things up and running, even if it's only
>> something as small as a web presence runni
On 11-08-02 at 06:40pm, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
> I think it's well established by now that freedombox will run a web
> server.
Personally I still keep it open to have a FreedomBox design without a
web UI. But I might be quite alone applying such odd principle.
> Tempting just to say apache2 a
On Tue, Aug 02, 2011 at 06:40:39PM +0200, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
> I think it's well established by now that freedombox will run a web server.
>
> I'm keen to start getting things up and running, even if it's only
> something as small as a web presence running under debian, maybe with
> an FB badg
On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 20:01 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> On 11-08-02 at 06:40pm, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
> > I think it's well established by now that freedombox will run a web
> > server.
>
> Personally I still keep it open to have a FreedomBox design without a
> web UI. But I might be quit
Do we have a preference, apache or nginx or user choice? Bear in mind
every option you allow will require support and increase time to
market.
Of the two, isn't Apache httpd the only one that supports WebID
(currently)? I don't know of any WebID support in nginx.
__
On 11-08-02 at 03:34pm, Ted Smith wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 20:01 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > Initially I will use apache2-mpm-worker due to failure in getting
> > nginx or lighttpd to sensibly support content-negotiating - which is
> > needed by jwchat which I've thrown in as a crude
On 11-08-02 at 11:02am, Lee Fisher wrote:
>
> >>>Do we have a preference, apache or nginx or user choice? Bear in
> >>>mind every option you allow will require support and increase time
> >>>to market.
>
> Of the two, isn't Apache httpd the only one that supports WebID
> (currently)? I don't
On 2 August 2011 22:29, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> On 11-08-02 at 11:02am, Lee Fisher wrote:
>>
>> >>>Do we have a preference, apache or nginx or user choice? Bear in
>> >>>mind every option you allow will require support and increase time
>> >>>to market.
>>
>> Of the two, isn't Apache httpd the
On 11-08-02 at 10:53pm, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
> On 2 August 2011 22:29, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > On 11-08-02 at 11:02am, Lee Fisher wrote:
> >>
> >> >>>Do we have a preference, apache or nginx or user choice? Bear
> >> >>>in mind every option you allow will require support and increase
> >>
Why choose one webserver as the official FreedomBox webserver? In my
opinion this would make things more complex than needed. On my
FreedomBox i have both Nginx and Apache running. Each for a different
functionality. I use Apache for running Wordpress blogs, Nginx is used
as a reverse proxy.
My F
13 matches
Mail list logo
