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

Re: common, FHS-compliant, default document root for the various web servers

hi stefano,

On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 10:09:20AM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> I understand this problem, but I think you're shooting at the wrong
> target. The advanced proposal (beside the aesthetically displeasing
> name) is about standardizing a default vendor document root on disk so
> that packages can install content in it, as well as defining a base URL
> that maps to it.
> Inherently, such a proposal applies to static content, not CGI
> applications. I fail to see where lay problems about unconfigured static
> content.

read-only static content unpacked from packages is certainly not an
issue wrt being "unconfigured", but i was given the impression by other
folks in this thread that the scope was not this narrow.  

but at the same time, if we're only talking about static content at this
filesystem location, i wonder about the overall utility/benefit of
standardizing on a location in the first place.  how many webapp packages
in debian consist of only read-only static content, which would be helped
by such a standardization?
wrt the issue about namespacing and default URL's (i guess this is
a seperate issue from fs location, really) i'm unconvinced about the
benefits outweighing the costs.  has anyone considered putting up the
arguments for it in a DEP?


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: