Edward Z. Yang wrote:
Excerpts from Adam Chlipala's message of Sat May 05 20:08:10 -0400 2012:
Why not just give "script.fcgi" a nicer name like "myApp"? You can't
use .htaccess to tell Apache which files are FastCGI scripts? Or is the
issue that the paths still wind up too long?
Yeah, I dislike having to have that path component. :-)
You want to have one Ur/Web application binary mapped into URI space
without a prefix shared by exactly the page handlers managed by this
app? Otherwise, I can't see how you lose any flexibility with the
current approach. Keep in mind that an Ur/Web app has a few "special"
URI's that are at the level of the full app. For instance, when using
server-to-client message passing, there is one URI used for all message
communication. In such a case, it seems unavoidable to give each app
its own subtree of the URI space.
There may be shenanigans in some hosting environments where
having the fcgi is mandated (I can't remember if this was the
case with scripts.mit.edu; I was testing a lot of variables
simultaneously, and the broken 404s weren't helping.)
I'd certainly appreciate a patch to send 404 signals properly. ;)
_______________________________________________
Ur mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.impredicative.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ur
