Re: What about virtual hosting facility?
* sean finney (seanius@debian.org) disait :
> 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?
It would work I guess, but the user here wants something like
http://host/ instead of http://host/bugzilla/
In the current bugzilla 2.18 package, that's possible with editing a
Perl module named Config.pm which sets a $webpath variable, but that's
not a good thing to point the user to editing such a file, I'd rather
have some config option for such a need.
> 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.
In the current bugzilla package, I cannot do that because CGIs are
installed in /usr/lib/cgi-bin/package (I follow the old policy as you
can see) thus, I have to point the CGI to the right location (using foo
instead of /bugzilla/foo would lead to something like
/cgi-bin/bugzilla/foo).
> > 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.
Here is what I think about severities:
"important" issues
The webapp does not provide any vhost facility.
The webapp provides a vhost facility but that needs harcoded patches.
"normal" issue
The webapp is vhost-able but does not use the dh_webapps helper for
registering the webapp as a standalone or a vhost website.
As you can see, I really like the idea of a dh_webappsfoo that could
register the webapps either as a standalone or as a vhost. Please tell
me what you think about that.
--
Alexis Sukrieh <sukria@sukria.net>
http://www.sukria.net
« Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur. »
Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.
Reply to: