[ New proposals should be added at the end of the list ]
- * Makefile.win: Added copying of .vbs / .wsf CGIs to Windows install target.
- Moved fixing of shebang to separate target so that it is
- no longer executed by default and all CGIs remain inactive.
- trunk patch: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1387984
- http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1421203
- http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1421591
- 2.4.x patch: http://people.apache.org/~fuankg/diffs/httpd-2.4.x-Makefile.win.diff
- +1 fuankg, gsmith
- -.8: trawick
- This commit is essentially deciding that an httpd install on
- Windows now has printenv/testcgi written in 2 more languages.
- To the extent that the usefulness is that it shows how to make scripts
- of these types executable by httpd, I believe that the documentation
- is the proper place to solve that. To the extent that the usefullness
- is to show how to implement a CGI in these particular languages, I believe
- that the httpd distribution and documentation in general is not the
- place for that. Historically these types of scripts have caused problems
- for downstream vendorsas well as newbies (and sometimes the intersection
- of those two groups) who don't understand that these are information leaks
- once they are enabled, and the subtlety of the way they are disabled ("Apache
- messed up the first line; let me fix that") contributes to that.
- fuankg notes: I've just added a big warning to all CGI scripts which should now
- make absolutely clear that these CGIs are for testing purpose only - so those
- who enable those scripts with inserting the right shebang should be 100% aware
- of any risks (this should cover your last point).
- jim: trawick, does the above address your concerns?
- trawick: to some extent (somebody reading the script gets an idea)
- Why isn't the configuration requirement documented instead
- of described indirectly in a sample?
- Why are these new samples added to the install without three
- votes? (I didn't veto it; put your name next to the two
- existing ones and I'll be satisified that enough people
- considered this addition as an appropriate solution for a
- real httpd usability problem.)
- wrowe: I'd agree with trawick, and suggest that these scripts can begin
- their life somewhere in the manual/ tree. This really seems like
- the place where /usr/share/httpd/examples/ would be useful, but
- there isn't an ordinary directory for that. Since we want none
- of the scripts to function 'out of the box', what about a new
- cgi-examples/ dir alongside cgi-bin/? Otherwise manual/cgi/examples
- might work?
* mod_proxy: Allow balancers and ProxyPass to be server-specific, as
they should have been. Inheritance causes too many behind-the-scene
why it is not premature.
minfrin: once this gets docs, +1.
+ * Makefile.win: Added copying of .vbs / .wsf CGIs to Windows install target.
+ Moved fixing of shebang to separate target so that it is
+ no longer executed by default and all CGIs remain inactive.
+ trunk patch: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1387984
+ http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1421203
+ http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1421591
+ 2.4.x patch: http://people.apache.org/~fuankg/diffs/httpd-2.4.x-Makefile.win.diff
+ +1 fuankg, gsmith
+ -.8: trawick
+ This commit is essentially deciding that an httpd install on
+ Windows now has printenv/testcgi written in 2 more languages.
+ To the extent that the usefulness is that it shows how to make scripts
+ of these types executable by httpd, I believe that the documentation
+ is the proper place to solve that. To the extent that the usefullness
+ is to show how to implement a CGI in these particular languages, I believe
+ that the httpd distribution and documentation in general is not the
+ place for that. Historically these types of scripts have caused problems
+ for downstream vendorsas well as newbies (and sometimes the intersection
+ of those two groups) who don't understand that these are information leaks
+ once they are enabled, and the subtlety of the way they are disabled ("Apache
+ messed up the first line; let me fix that") contributes to that.
+ fuankg notes: I've just added a big warning to all CGI scripts which should now
+ make absolutely clear that these CGIs are for testing purpose only - so those
+ who enable those scripts with inserting the right shebang should be 100% aware
+ of any risks (this should cover your last point).
+ jim: trawick, does the above address your concerns?
+ trawick: to some extent (somebody reading the script gets an idea)
+ Why isn't the configuration requirement documented instead
+ of described indirectly in a sample?
+ Why are these new samples added to the install without three
+ votes? (I didn't veto it; put your name next to the two
+ existing ones and I'll be satisified that enough people
+ considered this addition as an appropriate solution for a
+ real httpd usability problem.)
+ wrowe: I'd agree with trawick, and suggest that these scripts can begin
+ their life somewhere in the manual/ tree. This really seems like
+ the place where /usr/share/httpd/examples/ would be useful, but
+ there isn't an ordinary directory for that. Since we want none
+ of the scripts to function 'out of the box', what about a new
+ cgi-examples/ dir alongside cgi-bin/? Otherwise manual/cgi/examples
+ might work?
+
projects / apache / commitdiff