Re: [PATCH] for error-notes and ap_send_error_response()

["Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@kiwi.ics.uci.edu>]

In message <36...@Golux.Com>, Rodent of Unusual Size writes:
>The attached patch restores the old default behaviour of
>ap_send_error_response() -- namely, to use the canned
>content-body text coded into http_protocol at all times,
>ignoring any error-notes text.  If someone wants to

No, -1.  All the times that I used error-notes text in core were
to add problem-specific information to the canned response.
The error response makes no sense without it.
ErrorDocument is a feature that I would never recommend to users.

The correct solution is to insert the text in the normal canned
response rather than overriding it, and use a flag on ap_log_rerror()
to add the error-notes rather than making it automatic.

....Roy

Re: [PATCH] for error-notes and ap_send_error_response()

[Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@Golux.Com>]

Ben Hyde wrote:
> 
> Given that the HTTP's request/response pattern is nothing more than a
> kind of function call it seems natural that the server would provide
> the site author a way to do exception handling on errors.
> ErrorDocument is, such as it is, that mechanism.  You gotta have
> something of the kind.  Sites get errors and they need to be nice to
> all users when they happen.  I remain confused, why advise people to
> avoid it?

I don't think Roy's advising people to avoid using it, he's just
avoiding advising people to use it. :-)

He's got a good point; it's something with hidden costs.

#ken	P-)}

Ken Coar                    <http://Web.Golux.Com/coar/>
Apache Group member         <http://www.apache.org/>
"Apache Server for Dummies" <http://Web.Golux.Com/coar/ASFD/>

Re: [PATCH] for error-notes and ap_send_error_response()

[Ben Hyde <bh...@pobox.com>]

Given that the HTTP's request/response pattern is nothing more than a
kind of function call it seems natural that the server would provide
the site author a way to do exception handling on errors.
ErrorDocument is, such as it is, that mechanism.  You gotta have
something of the kind.  Sites get errors and they need to be nice to
all users when they happen.  I remain confused, why advise people to
avoid it?

 - ben hyde

Re: [PATCH] for error-notes and ap_send_error_response()

[Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@Golux.Com>]

Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> 
> No, -1.  All the times that I used error-notes text in core were
> to add problem-specific information to the canned response.
> The error response makes no sense without it.

The error response is completely opaque to almost all users
(the ones that see it) anyway, with or without the details.

> ErrorDocument is a feature that I would never recommend to users.

Why not?  That sounds like a personal preference; is there
more to it?

> The correct solution is to insert the text in the normal canned
> response rather than overriding it, and use a flag on ap_log_rerror()
> to add the error-notes rather than making it automatic.

I'll go along with the first but not necessarily the last.
Modules can still stuff values in there, which may show up on
the error page and be completely stupid.

Take 2 coming up, which explicitly includes the error-notes in
the content-body for HTTP_BAD_REQUEST status values only.

#ken    P-)}

Ken Coar                    <http://Web.Golux.Com/coar/>
Apache Group member         <http://www.apache.org/>
"Apache Server for Dummies" <http://Web.Golux.Com/coar/ASFD/>