You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@httpd.apache.org by "Dan Mahoney, System Admin" <da...@prime.gushi.org> on 2007/12/22 20:27:50 UTC
[users@httpd] outdated material on apache web-site
Hey all,
I came across this http://httpd.apache.org/related_projects.html:
Apache-SSL
Apache-SSL is an encrypting web server, based on Apache and OpenSSL, which
implements Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) functionality as a set of patches to
existing Apache source code.
The webserver is distributed with the full source code. Inside the United
States you may use it for non-commercial purposes for free if you use
RSAREF (due to various patents). Outside the United States you may use it
for both commercial and non-commercial purposes for free.
If you wish to use Apache with SSL commercially, inside the United States,
you may want to look at Stronghold or Raven. Apache-SSL is available here.
---
This info is seriously outdated, as neither stronghold nor raven are
available anymore, and the RSA patent is at this point long expired.
(This page also makes no mention of mod_ssl).
-Dan Mahoney
--
"We need another cat. This one's retarded."
-Cali, March 8, 2003 (3:43 AM)
--------Dan Mahoney--------
Techie, Sysadmin, WebGeek
Gushi on efnet/undernet IRC
ICQ: 13735144 AIM: LarpGM
Site: http://www.gushi.org
---------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
" from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: [users@httpd] outdated material on apache web-site
Posted by Joshua Slive <jo...@slive.ca>.
On Dec 22, 2007 7:04 PM, Victor Trac <vi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That's a constructive response that the original poster would have
> appreciated. I'm sure he wasn't the first person to be confused by
> the outdated documentation, but just the first to bother to take the
> time to write to the mailing list about it. Telling him to ignore the
> page and not to trust any old google search is akin to saying that his
> input is not valuable.
Although this thread has gone on way too far already, I'll point out
that this wasn't just some flippant remark made to annoy someone. It
was advice that I consider to be valuable.
Taking a page that you stumble upon in a search as accurate without
considering its context is a bad idea. How did he know that this page
wasn't linked from a page on the apache site specifying "The following
pages are of historical interest only." (And, effectively, the absence
of links to this page says exactly that.) And being under apache.org
is not sufficient context. There are literally thousands (and quite
likely millions) of pages under apache.org that give outdated,
erroneous, and possibly even dangerous information if you take them
out of context.
Search engines are great, but don't forget about context.
Joshua.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
" from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: [users@httpd] outdated material on apache web-site
Posted by Victor Trac <vi...@gmail.com>.
On Dec 23, 2007 12:32 AM, Joshua Slive <jo...@slive.ca> wrote:
>
> On Dec 22, 2007 6:11 PM, Victor Trac <vi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Dec 22, 2007 10:55 PM, Joshua Slive <jo...@slive.ca> wrote:
> >
> > > On Dec 22, 2007 2:27 PM, Dan Mahoney, System Admin <da...@prime.gushi.org>
> > wrote:
> > > > Hey all,
> > > >
> > > > I came across this http://httpd.apache.org/related_projects.html:
> > >
> > > > This info is seriously outdated, as neither stronghold nor raven are
> > > > available anymore, and the RSA patent is at this point long expired.
> > > > (This page also makes no mention of mod_ssl).
> > >
> > > You'll notice that this page isn't linked from anywhere.
> >
> > I have to respectfully disagree here. The original poster came across them
> > somehow, so it's linked from somewhere.
>
> Go ask google where it is linked from. You'll see that it is
> vanishingly close to nowhere.
>
>
> > >
> > > You run a certain risk when you do random google searches and expect
> > > the result to be authoritative. It wouldn't be a bad idea to have a
> > > "This page is obsolete" message at the top, but it shouldn't be
> > > causing problems in any case.
> > >
> > > Joshua.
> >
> > It isn't unreasonable to expect that a document from a http.apache.org
> > address to be authoritative. It is one thing to look at a search result
> > from some random blog, but this is apache.org, a domain that should be most
> > authoritative about apache.
> >
> > Documentation should be as accurate and clean as any code. If there is an
> > obscure bug that only affects a very small percentage of people, it is
> > reasonable to expect that the code be fixed to maintain a certain level of
> > quality for the project overall. Just because it "shouldn't cause any
> > problems" doesn't mean it shouldn't be fixed. The page should be fixed or
> > deleted.
>
> If you want a code analogy, this is more equivalent to a bug in a
> source file that is not even included in the final program. Sure, it
> should be fixed, but it is hardly important.
I completely agree with you that it's not a very important issue, but
my point is that apache.org is not just any google search as it should
be the start of authority for anything apache related.
> And speaking of getting bugs fixed, the bug database would be the
> place to file issues like this so they aren't lost.
>
That's a constructive response that the original poster would have
appreciated. I'm sure he wasn't the first person to be confused by
the outdated documentation, but just the first to bother to take the
time to write to the mailing list about it. Telling him to ignore the
page and not to trust any old google search is akin to saying that his
input is not valuable.
People are intimidated enough writing to mailing lists, so anything we
can do to encourage people to participate is good for Apache as a
whole, even if it is just to point out where the proper place to file
the bug report is.
--
http://www.victortrac.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
" from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: [users@httpd] outdated material on apache web-site
Posted by Res <re...@ausics.net>.
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007, Joshua Slive wrote:
> On Dec 22, 2007 6:11 PM, Victor Trac <vi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Documentation should be as accurate and clean as any code. If there is an
>> obscure bug that only affects a very small percentage of people, it is
>> reasonable to expect that the code be fixed to maintain a certain level of
>
> If you want a code analogy, this is more equivalent to a bug in a
> source file that is not even included in the final program. Sure, it
> should be fixed, but it is hardly important.
Speaking of bugs maybe victor can fix his email, html formatting is
screwed up, not to mention its bad netiquette to use it on mailing
lists (and newsgroups).
I agree, as this "document" is NOT critical to Apaches operation, because
it is not part of the core code required to run, it is hardly of any
significant importance, every web site has errors or outdatet info on it.
> And speaking of getting bugs fixed, the bug database would be the
> place to file issues like this so they aren't lost.
Dont be silly, why would he do that? I mean just because its the logical
place to report it :)
--
Cheers
Res
mysql> update auth set Framed-IP-Address='127.0.0.127' where user= 'troll';
~# radzap troll
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
" from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: [users@httpd] outdated material on apache web-site
Posted by Joshua Slive <jo...@slive.ca>.
On Dec 22, 2007 6:11 PM, Victor Trac <vi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 22, 2007 10:55 PM, Joshua Slive <jo...@slive.ca> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 22, 2007 2:27 PM, Dan Mahoney, System Admin <da...@prime.gushi.org>
> wrote:
> > > Hey all,
> > >
> > > I came across this http://httpd.apache.org/related_projects.html:
> >
> > > This info is seriously outdated, as neither stronghold nor raven are
> > > available anymore, and the RSA patent is at this point long expired.
> > > (This page also makes no mention of mod_ssl).
> >
> > You'll notice that this page isn't linked from anywhere.
>
> I have to respectfully disagree here. The original poster came across them
> somehow, so it's linked from somewhere.
Go ask google where it is linked from. You'll see that it is
vanishingly close to nowhere.
> >
> > You run a certain risk when you do random google searches and expect
> > the result to be authoritative. It wouldn't be a bad idea to have a
> > "This page is obsolete" message at the top, but it shouldn't be
> > causing problems in any case.
> >
> > Joshua.
>
> It isn't unreasonable to expect that a document from a http.apache.org
> address to be authoritative. It is one thing to look at a search result
> from some random blog, but this is apache.org, a domain that should be most
> authoritative about apache.
>
> Documentation should be as accurate and clean as any code. If there is an
> obscure bug that only affects a very small percentage of people, it is
> reasonable to expect that the code be fixed to maintain a certain level of
> quality for the project overall. Just because it "shouldn't cause any
> problems" doesn't mean it shouldn't be fixed. The page should be fixed or
> deleted.
If you want a code analogy, this is more equivalent to a bug in a
source file that is not even included in the final program. Sure, it
should be fixed, but it is hardly important.
And speaking of getting bugs fixed, the bug database would be the
place to file issues like this so they aren't lost.
Joshua.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
" from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: [users@httpd] outdated material on apache web-site
Posted by Victor Trac <vi...@gmail.com>.
On Dec 22, 2007 10:55 PM, Joshua Slive <jo...@slive.ca> wrote:
> On Dec 22, 2007 2:27 PM, Dan Mahoney, System Admin <da...@prime.gushi.org>
> wrote:
> > Hey all,
> >
> > I came across this http://httpd.apache.org/related_projects.html:
>
> > This info is seriously outdated, as neither stronghold nor raven are
> > available anymore, and the RSA patent is at this point long expired.
> > (This page also makes no mention of mod_ssl).
>
> You'll notice that this page isn't linked from anywhere.
I have to respectfully disagree here. The original poster came across them
somehow, so it's linked from *somewhere*.
>
> You run a certain risk when you do random google searches and expect
> the result to be authoritative. It wouldn't be a bad idea to have a
> "This page is obsolete" message at the top, but it shouldn't be
> causing problems in any case.
>
> Joshua.
It isn't unreasonable to expect that a document from a
http.apache.orgaddress to be authoritative. It is one thing to look
at a search result
from some random blog, but this is apache.org, a domain that should be *most
*authoritative about apache.
Documentation should be as accurate and clean as any code. If there is an
obscure bug that only affects a very small percentage of people, it is
reasonable to expect that the code be fixed to maintain a certain level of
quality for the project overall. Just because it "shouldn't cause any
problems" doesn't mean it shouldn't be fixed. The page should be fixed or
deleted.
--Victor
--
http://www.victortrac.com
Re: [users@httpd] outdated material on apache web-site
Posted by Joshua Slive <jo...@slive.ca>.
On Dec 22, 2007 2:27 PM, Dan Mahoney, System Admin <da...@prime.gushi.org> wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> I came across this http://httpd.apache.org/related_projects.html:
> This info is seriously outdated, as neither stronghold nor raven are
> available anymore, and the RSA patent is at this point long expired.
> (This page also makes no mention of mod_ssl).
You'll notice that this page isn't linked from anywhere.
You run a certain risk when you do random google searches and expect
the result to be authoritative. It wouldn't be a bad idea to have a
"This page is obsolete" message at the top, but it shouldn't be
causing problems in any case.
Joshua.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
" from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org