Re: [LCFC2] templates://typo3-dummy/{typo3-dummy.templates}
David Prévot wrote:
> I forgot to include typo3-dummy maintainers in my previous mail,
I'll insert my comments on that message here:
:David Prévot previously wrote:
:> + TYPO3 has been included into the apache2 configuration and
:> + the rewrite module has been activated. In order
:>
:> Rationale: avoid the useless mention of "typo3-dummy package", and get
:> rid of one of the two "configuration" word (actually, the first one is
:> not really correct, since it really is Apache 2 that is configured at
:> this stage, in order to make TYPO3 work, but TYPO3 configuration files
:> must be elsewhere, as /etc/typo3/). On the other hand, the two phrases
:> "has been [...]ed" doesn't sound really great, maybe it could be better
:> to find other wordings.
It's also a little odd to claim that the rewrite module has been
activated when (as it goes on to say) apache2 still needs to be
reloaded before this change takes effect. What do you think of:
Apache's configuration has been changed to include TYPO3 and
activate the rewrite module. For these changes to take effect,
apache2 must be reloaded.
:> - contents into one of the new .conf files.
:> + contents into one of the new configuration files
Agreed.
> and
> have another remark: I also thought that the "shorter" word in "shorter
> URLs with TYPO3 as part of the domain name" isn't really true (one can
> use, as it is proposed in the second example, to install TYPO3 in a
> directory like "cms" (and "/cms" is only four symbols long while
> "typo3." is two symbols longer), but I fail to find a suitable wording
> ("nicer" is really subjective), maybe something more neutral like "URLs
> in a subdomain" would be more accurate?
Tricky. Are they "simpler" URLs? "Self-contained" URLs? Maybe we
should abandon the effort to describe them and let the explanation
stand by itself:
vhost: generates URLs with TYPO3 as part of the domain name, such
as http://typo3.example.com/;
--
JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian
sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package
Reply to: