[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: What about virtual hosting facility?



This one time, at band camp, sean finney said:
> hey,
> 
> On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 12:06:43PM +0200, Alexis Sukrieh wrote:
> > The bug submitter complains about the fact that the webapp comes as a
> > standalone web site and uses an url prefix like '/bugzilla' for every
> > static urls needed (link to css pages or images).
> 
> is this an absolute reference in the actual pages, or just what
> the apache config aliases it to?  would it not work in a vhost
> using the same /bugzilla alias?
> 
> what i've done in nagios is to change all the references of "/nagios/foo"
> in the html pages to "foo".  this allows nagios to work in a vhost
> without a leading /nagios, or on another site in a possibly more deeply
> nested and/or differently named directory.
> 
> > I'm also wondering what is the best severity for bugs like "Your foo
> > webapp package does not provide any Virtual Hosting facility".
> 
> well, there's a difference between providing a vhost facility and
> not being able to be vhosted.  i'd say the former is wishlist and
> the latter somewhere between wishlist and serious, depending on
> what we decide.  
> 
> to make sure an app is vhost-able, i don't think that much more needs
> to be done other than removing all hard-coded and non-configurable
> absolute references in the code.  maybe we could say something to
> that effect?

Most webapps that I am familiar with use a config.{pm,php} that sets the
path for pages.  Mandating a wrapper config file for vhosts would solve
much of this, I would think - something that just does
case $REQUESTURL in
  foo.org
    include Config.foo.php
  bar.org
    include Config.bar.php
  *
    include Config.default.php
esac

(Clearly pseudo code that won't work in any real language, but you get
the idea)  This file could just be shipped with the * case enabled, and
comments in it telling people how to enable per-vhost configurations.

Some webapps already come with vhost stuff built in (squirrelmail comes
to mind here) so allowing for an override of policy for those apps would
of course be fine.
-- 
 -----------------------------------------------------------------
|   ,''`.					     Stephen Gran |
|  : :' :					 sgran@debian.org |
|  `. `'			Debian user, admin, and developer |
|    `-					    http://www.debian.org |
 -----------------------------------------------------------------

Attachment: pgp9P9HW0qPWa.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: