Daniel Stone wrote: > I'm not sure I love the /debian-www/ bit; it's a bit aesthetically > displeasing, but to each their own. Good idea otherwise, however. I agree, it is not the prettiest name. I considered just /debian/, but it seemed more likely that would conflict with something on someone's web server. Do note that there is nothing stopping an admin from linking /foo/ to /debian-www/. They'll have to keep /debian-www/ around because of links that will refer to it, but they can use whatever prettier url they can come up with. So it's not too bad. > I suppose the other achoice is to put all Debian content in > /debian-www/, and only have index.html redirecting to /debian-www/, so > that way the user only has to overwrite a ~100-byte file. Or something. That's a pretty good idea, if it can be done without ugly timeouts in redirect and with localisation still working. -- see shy jo
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature