Gabriela Gibson wrote on Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 21:03:58 +0000:
> On 20/02/13 18:54, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>> Gabriela Gibson wrote on Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 16:22:36 +0000:
>>> +<p>Putting it all together, an example VirtualHost configuration is:</p>
>>> +
>>> +<pre><VirtualHost *:8080>
>>> + ServerAdmin webmaster_at_localhost
>>
>> Consider putting this example in a separate *.conf file, to make it
>> easier to reuse?
>
> I've left it on for now, but I'm wondering if you find it too spammy
> this way or it's just the convenience of the *.conf file? We can do
> both, but indeed, there is a lot to be said for brevity.
>
It's not about spammy, it's about convenience for people who use it, as
I tried to demonstrate in the 'diff' invocation I gave:
>> 'diff -u ~/projects/svn/site/**/svnsite.conf /etc/apache2/svnsite.conf'
Doing both would cause redundancy... unless you use an SSI include to
inline the .conf snippet file into the HTML ?
>>> +<p>then upload the resulting file to a HTML validatory, for
>>
>> "validatory"?
>>
> Yes :) It's an unusual but technically correct term. I've left it in
> for now, because one thing about documentation is that it's a little
> boring to read, and interesting wording helps people remember things
> easier.
>
See below.
>> +1 to commit. (Everything else can be addressed post-commit if you
>> disagree with the review.) Thanks or the patch!
>>
>
> To sum up:
>
> 1) .htaccess and permission changes will go into a separate patch.
>
> 2) With view to a further patch, the term 'Validatory' is still being
> discussed,
You're being generous here. You said "validatory" was right and I won't
argue with a native British speaker about such matters.
> and we need to decide is the conf stays on the page and/or is
> moved to it's own file, linked from this spot.
>
You wrote the patch, so whatever you decide. (My review comment around
that was a suggestion, not a requirement.) Please commit.
Received on 2013-02-20 22:20:08 CET