Gabriela Gibson wrote on Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 21:03:58 +0000: > On 20/02/13 18:54, Daniel Shahaf wrote: >> Gabriela Gibson wrote on Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 16:22:36 +0000: >>> +<p>Putting it all together, an example VirtualHost configuration is:</p> >>> + >>> +<pre><VirtualHost *:8080> >>> + ServerAdmin webmaster@localhost >> >> Consider putting this example in a separate *.conf file, to make it >> easier to reuse? > > I've left it on for now, but I'm wondering if you find it too spammy > this way or it's just the convenience of the *.conf file? We can do > both, but indeed, there is a lot to be said for brevity. >
It's not about spammy, it's about convenience for people who use it, as I tried to demonstrate in the 'diff' invocation I gave: >> 'diff -u ~/projects/svn/site/**/svnsite.conf /etc/apache2/svnsite.conf' Doing both would cause redundancy... unless you use an SSI include to inline the .conf snippet file into the HTML ? >>> +<p>then upload the resulting file to a HTML validatory, for >> >> "validatory"? >> > Yes :) It's an unusual but technically correct term. I've left it in > for now, because one thing about documentation is that it's a little > boring to read, and interesting wording helps people remember things > easier. > See below. >> +1 to commit. (Everything else can be addressed post-commit if you >> disagree with the review.) Thanks or the patch! >> > > To sum up: > > 1) .htaccess and permission changes will go into a separate patch. > > 2) With view to a further patch, the term 'Validatory' is still being > discussed, You're being generous here. You said "validatory" was right and I won't argue with a native British speaker about such matters. > and we need to decide is the conf stays on the page and/or is > moved to it's own file, linked from this spot. > You wrote the patch, so whatever you decide. (My review comment around that was a suggestion, not a requirement.) Please commit.
