> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ignacio J. Ortega [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >
> > I'm calling them 'default' (Nacho calls them global) simply
> > because this
> > name is more what they really are (mappings bound to the
> > default host).
> >
>
> I think we are calling it diffreent because they were different ( at
> least for me ), not tested lately with apache so lost track of the
> code.. but what you ask now is what i called global mappings then,
> mappings that are used on every VS in a server, not only on no-named
> ones as it seems means now..
>
Well, the problem was that the vhosts didn't behave as they should (at
least from my point of view ;).
For example if you had a (global) mapping that mapped *.jsp, you had no
mean to forbid that rule on any virtual host.
That is IMO no good at all. Even further there was no meen to forbid any
mappings on a selected vhost.
Now, the question is are we going to allow that by default and forbid
explicitly, or forbid by default and allow explicitly (that my favor).
Either way we need a option parameter (I'm thinking that the
'inheritGlobal' would be a good one).
> I'll post the use-cases i'm pursuing, next days.. i need to do some
> tests, to get to know what we have now..
>
Good.
MT.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
