You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk> on 2012/07/08 22:33:56 UTC
[VOTE] Adopt the comments.a.o system to the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of
the httpd docs
After many an attempt, we now have LDAP authentication for
comments.apache.org set up, and the comment system is ready to roll. Any
committer that wishes to moderate comments can now do so using their
Apache credentials.
With that in order, and with the comment system already tested in our
trunk branch (as well as on the Apache Traffic Server site), I would
propose that we also adopt this new system for the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of
our documentation, so we can get some useful comments from the majority
of people who don't normally visit the trunk docs.
Voting will last the usual 72 hours, standard majority consensus
applies. If you haven't already, I suggest you try out the system by
either posting a comment somewhere or by logging onto the moderator
control panel and familiarizing yourself with it.
[ ] +1: Adopt the comments.a.o system in the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of docs
[ ] 0: I don't care
[ ] -1: Don't adopt the system, because....
With regards,
Daniel.
Re: [VOTE] Adopt the comments.a.o system to the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of
the httpd docs
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
>
>
> [ x ] +1: Adopt the comments.a.o system in the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of docs
> [ ] 0: I don't care
> [ ] -1: Don't adopt the system, because....
>
--
Rich Bowen
rbowen@rcbowen.com
Current configuration of httpd site on comments.a.o
Posted by Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk>.
As to not clutter the vote with too much stuff, I'm posting a new thread
here with some more in-detail information about how the httpd project is
set up on comments.apache.org, and what will happen if the vote passes
tonight:
=========================
Options that are enabled:
=========================
- Users have to register an account and validate their email in order to
receive reply notifications (thanks for this idea, Stefan)
- HTML is NOT allowed
- Comments cannot be longer than 2,500 characters. This should be enough
to write a couple of paragraphs and show some configuration examples.
- Names cannot contain links
- Comments that contain links other than those pointing to *.apache.org
are flagged as 'not approved' and will need to be approved by a
moderator before showing up on the site
=========================================
Options that are not enabled, but can be:
=========================================
- Posting a comment can require a registered account
- Users can use Gravatar avatars next to their comments
- Posting new comments can be disabled
- Showing comments can be disabled
========================
Non-committer moderators
========================
Users that are not committers can be permitted to moderate our site.
This can be a great way to allow new people to be "semi-committers"
without having to actually invite, vote and set them up as committers
just yet. Currently, we have one user, Sling (Mathijs) set up as a
moderator for the httpd site, and I have full confidence that he'll do
an excellent job, just as he is doing, helping out on our IRC channel.
==========================================
Integration of comments.a.o into the docs:
==========================================
Once the voting is done, and provided the vote passes, I will start
integrating the comments system into the 2.2 and 2.4 branch. I won't be
doing it tonight, but rather tomorrow when I am satisfied that any
remaining kinks in the system has been dealt with. By holding off till
tomorrow, we should have a fresh set of eyes on the launch, in case we
start receiving many comments. I will start by adding the system to the
2.4 branch, and let it work for a day or two before adding it to the 2.2
branch, as 2.4 presumably has less traffic and thus would be easier to
fix should anything be off about the system.
If there are any other concerns or just curiosities, by all means, reply
to this email and we'll discuss them in this thread.
With regards,
Daniel.
Current configuration of httpd site on comments.a.o
Posted by Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk>.
As to not clutter the vote with too much stuff, I'm posting a new thread
here with some more in-detail information about how the httpd project is
set up on comments.apache.org, and what will happen if the vote passes
tonight:
=========================
Options that are enabled:
=========================
- Users have to register an account and validate their email in order to
receive reply notifications (thanks for this idea, Stefan)
- HTML is NOT allowed
- Comments cannot be longer than 2,500 characters. This should be enough
to write a couple of paragraphs and show some configuration examples.
- Names cannot contain links
- Comments that contain links other than those pointing to *.apache.org
are flagged as 'not approved' and will need to be approved by a
moderator before showing up on the site
=========================================
Options that are not enabled, but can be:
=========================================
- Posting a comment can require a registered account
- Users can use Gravatar avatars next to their comments
- Posting new comments can be disabled
- Showing comments can be disabled
========================
Non-committer moderators
========================
Users that are not committers can be permitted to moderate our site.
This can be a great way to allow new people to be "semi-committers"
without having to actually invite, vote and set them up as committers
just yet. Currently, we have one user, Sling (Mathijs) set up as a
moderator for the httpd site, and I have full confidence that he'll do
an excellent job, just as he is doing, helping out on our IRC channel.
==========================================
Integration of comments.a.o into the docs:
==========================================
Once the voting is done, and provided the vote passes, I will start
integrating the comments system into the 2.2 and 2.4 branch. I won't be
doing it tonight, but rather tomorrow when I am satisfied that any
remaining kinks in the system has been dealt with. By holding off till
tomorrow, we should have a fresh set of eyes on the launch, in case we
start receiving many comments. I will start by adding the system to the
2.4 branch, and let it work for a day or two before adding it to the 2.2
branch, as 2.4 presumably has less traffic and thus would be easier to
fix should anything be off about the system.
If there are any other concerns or just curiosities, by all means, reply
to this email and we'll discuss them in this thread.
With regards,
Daniel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Adopt the comments.a.o system to the 2.2 and 2.4 branch
of the httpd docs
Posted by Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk>.
On 07/11/2012 08:24 AM, Kaspar Brand wrote:
> On 08.07.2012 22:33, Daniel Gruno wrote:
>> [ ] +1: Adopt the comments.a.o system in the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of docs
>> [ ] 0: I don't care
>> [ ] -1: Don't adopt the system, because....
>
> Thanks for enduring your work on this - glad to see that it has become
> comments.a.o. in the meantime! I'm in favor of enabling it for 2.2/2.4,
> generally speaking, but am having some concerns with regard to the
> proposed approval policy: it changed from the "Comments will be
> moderated by appointed moderators" to "Comments will, in general, be
> allowed through without pre-approval. Comments with hyperlinks in them
> will require approval from a moderator before they are shown on the
> site" [1].
>
> Auto-approval of comments makes me feel somewhat uneasy - on the one
> hand, there's the risk of inappropriate/incorrect content appearing on
> httpd.apache.org and going unnoticed for some time, and on the other
> hand, this means that input validation ("Name" and "Comment" fields in
> particular) has to be very tight... is
> http://c.apaste.info/source/add_comment.lua the current version of the
> code which validates the input? (If so, it's e.g. missing checks for
> https URIs, and at least at first sight, I couldn't spot any further
> checks on the POST input you're processing [the "site", "page", "thread"
> variables etc.].)
>
> Kaspar
>
> [1] http://wiki.apache.org/httpd/DocsCommentSystem?action=diff&rev1=6&rev2=7
>
Hi Kaspar,
No, I haven't updated that source repository since we moved it all to
the infra SVN repo about a month ago. It is now in place at
https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/infrastructure/trunk/projects/comments/
and has been rewritten extensively.
names and comments are checked for http(s) schemes, size (no more than
2500 characters allowed) and so on, and while comments require approval
if a hyperlink is found that doesn't point to an official apache web
site, names with hyperlinks are flat out denied.
I think the general idea has, from the start, been to allow for comments
to go through without pre-approval, at least for a period so we can see
if that's what we want. If we later on decide that all comments needs
approval before they are shown, then fine, we'll do so. The system is
geared to respond to a lot of different wishes from different projects,
for example, some may choose to enable Gravatar avatars for their
comments, while others may not (this is not enabled for the httpd site
by the way ;) ).
As for comments going unnoticed, we currently have four people who
automatically receive an email when someone posts on the site and we
have the option to add *every single Apache committer* to this list of
people moderating our site, so I think any 'bad' comments will be
spotted rather fast and removed.
We also have other options up our sleeves:
1) We can require that all posters be registered users first
2) We can ban the sorry people that try to spam out site
3) We can temporarily disable comments on the fly if something goes wrong
I hope this answered your concerns, and if you have any other
suggestions for how our little part of comments.a.o should work, please
do say so, and I'll see if I can figure out a way to make it work.
With regards,
Daniel.
Re: [VOTE] Adopt the comments.a.o system to the 2.2 and 2.4 branch
of the httpd docs
Posted by Kaspar Brand <ht...@velox.ch>.
On 08.07.2012 22:33, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> [ ] +1: Adopt the comments.a.o system in the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of docs
> [ ] 0: I don't care
> [ ] -1: Don't adopt the system, because....
Thanks for enduring your work on this - glad to see that it has become
comments.a.o. in the meantime! I'm in favor of enabling it for 2.2/2.4,
generally speaking, but am having some concerns with regard to the
proposed approval policy: it changed from the "Comments will be
moderated by appointed moderators" to "Comments will, in general, be
allowed through without pre-approval. Comments with hyperlinks in them
will require approval from a moderator before they are shown on the
site" [1].
Auto-approval of comments makes me feel somewhat uneasy - on the one
hand, there's the risk of inappropriate/incorrect content appearing on
httpd.apache.org and going unnoticed for some time, and on the other
hand, this means that input validation ("Name" and "Comment" fields in
particular) has to be very tight... is
http://c.apaste.info/source/add_comment.lua the current version of the
code which validates the input? (If so, it's e.g. missing checks for
https URIs, and at least at first sight, I couldn't spot any further
checks on the POST input you're processing [the "site", "page", "thread"
variables etc.].)
Kaspar
[1] http://wiki.apache.org/httpd/DocsCommentSystem?action=diff&rev1=6&rev2=7
Re: [VOTE] Adopt the comments.a.o system to the 2.2 and 2.4 branch
of the httpd docs
Posted by Ruediger Pluem <rp...@apache.org>.
Daniel Gruno wrote:
> After many an attempt, we now have LDAP authentication for
> comments.apache.org set up, and the comment system is ready to roll. Any
> committer that wishes to moderate comments can now do so using their
> Apache credentials.
>
> With that in order, and with the comment system already tested in our
> trunk branch (as well as on the Apache Traffic Server site), I would
> propose that we also adopt this new system for the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of
> our documentation, so we can get some useful comments from the majority
> of people who don't normally visit the trunk docs.
>
> Voting will last the usual 72 hours, standard majority consensus
> applies. If you haven't already, I suggest you try out the system by
> either posting a comment somewhere or by logging onto the moderator
> control panel and familiarizing yourself with it.
>
>
> [X] +1: Adopt the comments.a.o system in the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of docs
> [ ] 0: I don't care
> [ ] -1: Don't adopt the system, because....
>
>
Regards
Rüdiger
Re: [VOTE] Adopt the comments.a.o system to the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of the httpd docs
Posted by Joe Schaefer <jo...@yahoo.com>.
+1!
----- Original Message -----
> From: Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk>
> To: dev@httpd.apache.org; docs@httpd.apache.org
> Cc:
> Sent: Sunday, July 8, 2012 6:22 PM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Adopt the comments.a.o system to the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of the httpd docs
>
> On 07/08/2012 10:33 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
>
>> [X] +1: Adopt the comments.a.o system in the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of docs
>> [ ] 0: I don't care
>> [ ] -1: Don't adopt the system, because....
>>
>
> Forgot to cast my own vote - so there.
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Adopt the comments.a.o system to the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of the httpd docs
Posted by Joe Schaefer <jo...@yahoo.com>.
+1!
----- Original Message -----
> From: Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk>
> To: dev@httpd.apache.org; docs@httpd.apache.org
> Cc:
> Sent: Sunday, July 8, 2012 6:22 PM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Adopt the comments.a.o system to the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of the httpd docs
>
> On 07/08/2012 10:33 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
>
>> [X] +1: Adopt the comments.a.o system in the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of docs
>> [ ] 0: I don't care
>> [ ] -1: Don't adopt the system, because....
>>
>
> Forgot to cast my own vote - so there.
>
Re: [VOTE] Adopt the comments.a.o system to the 2.2 and 2.4 branch
of the httpd docs
Posted by Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk>.
On 07/08/2012 10:33 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> [X] +1: Adopt the comments.a.o system in the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of docs
> [ ] 0: I don't care
> [ ] -1: Don't adopt the system, because....
>
Forgot to cast my own vote - so there.
Re: [VOTE] Adopt the comments.a.o system to the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of the httpd docs
Posted by Lucien Gentis <lu...@medecine.uhp-nancy.fr>.
>
> On 08.07.2012 22:33, Daniel Gruno wrote:
>> [X] +1: Adopt the comments.a.o system in the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of docs
>> [ ] 0: I don't care
>> [ ] -1: Don't adopt the system, because....
>
Lucien Gentis
SIRET
Faculté de Médecine - Nancy
lucien.gentis@univ-lorraine.fr
03 83 68 30 62
Re: [VOTE] Adopt the comments.a.o system to the 2.2 and 2.4 branch
of the httpd docs
Posted by Rainer Jung <ra...@kippdata.de>.
On 08.07.2012 22:33, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> [X] +1: Adopt the comments.a.o system in the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of docs
> [ ] 0: I don't care
> [ ] -1: Don't adopt the system, because....
Thanks for your work on this!
Rainer
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Adopt the comments.a.o system to the 2.2 and 2.4 branch
of the httpd docs
Posted by Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk>.
On 07/10/2012 11:14 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Jul 2012, Daniel Gruno wrote:
>> [ ] +1: Adopt the comments.a.o system in the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of docs
>> [ ] 0: I don't care
>> [ ] -1: Don't adopt the system, because....
>
> I am +1 in principle, providing that some issues are fixed:
>
> Currently, it is possible to make comments.a.o send mail to arbitrary
> recipients because the email addresses are not verified. IMHO
> comments.a.o should only send mail to addresses that have been verified.
> This would mean that the email notification service would require an
> account.
>
> Also, it may be problematic that URLs that lack the protocol part (e.g.
> www.spam-now.com) are accepted. But it may be enough if such spam
> comments are removed by the moderators (at least if the mail address
> problem is solved).
>
> Cheers,
> Stefan
Thanks for your input, Stefan.
I've added a check that will only allow registered users to be notified
when someone replies to their comments. We also discussed email
confirmation checks on IRC, and I will look into that tomorrow, as well
as probably start a new thread on the ML for future suggestions to the
comments system. We can enable/disable these features at any point in
the future, if it becomes a hassle or any such thing.
With regards,
Daniel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Adopt the comments.a.o system to the 2.2 and 2.4 branch
of the httpd docs
Posted by Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk>.
On 07/10/2012 11:14 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Jul 2012, Daniel Gruno wrote:
>> [ ] +1: Adopt the comments.a.o system in the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of docs
>> [ ] 0: I don't care
>> [ ] -1: Don't adopt the system, because....
>
> I am +1 in principle, providing that some issues are fixed:
>
> Currently, it is possible to make comments.a.o send mail to arbitrary
> recipients because the email addresses are not verified. IMHO
> comments.a.o should only send mail to addresses that have been verified.
> This would mean that the email notification service would require an
> account.
>
> Also, it may be problematic that URLs that lack the protocol part (e.g.
> www.spam-now.com) are accepted. But it may be enough if such spam
> comments are removed by the moderators (at least if the mail address
> problem is solved).
>
> Cheers,
> Stefan
Thanks for your input, Stefan.
I've added a check that will only allow registered users to be notified
when someone replies to their comments. We also discussed email
confirmation checks on IRC, and I will look into that tomorrow, as well
as probably start a new thread on the ML for future suggestions to the
comments system. We can enable/disable these features at any point in
the future, if it becomes a hassle or any such thing.
With regards,
Daniel.
Re: [VOTE] Adopt the comments.a.o system to the 2.2 and 2.4 branch
of the httpd docs
Posted by Stefan Fritsch <sf...@sfritsch.de>.
On Sun, 8 Jul 2012, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> [ ] +1: Adopt the comments.a.o system in the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of docs
> [ ] 0: I don't care
> [ ] -1: Don't adopt the system, because....
I am +1 in principle, providing that some issues are fixed:
Currently, it is possible to make comments.a.o send mail to arbitrary
recipients because the email addresses are not verified. IMHO comments.a.o
should only send mail to addresses that have been verified. This would
mean that the email notification service would require an account.
Also, it may be problematic that URLs that lack the protocol part (e.g.
www.spam-now.com) are accepted. But it may be enough if such spam comments
are removed by the moderators (at least if the mail address problem is
solved).
Cheers,
Stefan
Re: [VOTE] Adopt the comments.a.o system to the 2.2 and 2.4 branch
of the httpd docs
Posted by Ruediger Pluem <rp...@apache.org>.
Daniel Gruno wrote:
> After many an attempt, we now have LDAP authentication for
> comments.apache.org set up, and the comment system is ready to roll. Any
> committer that wishes to moderate comments can now do so using their
> Apache credentials.
>
> With that in order, and with the comment system already tested in our
> trunk branch (as well as on the Apache Traffic Server site), I would
> propose that we also adopt this new system for the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of
> our documentation, so we can get some useful comments from the majority
> of people who don't normally visit the trunk docs.
>
> Voting will last the usual 72 hours, standard majority consensus
> applies. If you haven't already, I suggest you try out the system by
> either posting a comment somewhere or by logging onto the moderator
> control panel and familiarizing yourself with it.
>
>
> [X] +1: Adopt the comments.a.o system in the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of docs
> [ ] 0: I don't care
> [ ] -1: Don't adopt the system, because....
>
>
Regards
Rüdiger
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Adopt the comments.a.o system to the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of the httpd docs
Posted by Graham Leggett <mi...@sharp.fm>.
On 09 Jul 2012, at 12:12 AM, Mads Toftum wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 08, 2012 at 10:33:56PM +0200, Daniel Gruno wrote:
>> [ ] +1: Adopt the comments.a.o system in the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of docs
>> [ ] 0: I don't care
>> [X] -1: Don't adopt the system, because....
>>
> Only trunk is CTR.
The way I understand it what's been built is a comments system that allows end users to annotate the existing documentation, it doesn't represent a system that allows the documentation to be modified directly in any way.
As I understand it, the comments are not versioned at all, meaning that it makes no sense to say "CTR" or "RTC", as there is no "commit" in the comments system.
Would it be possible to clarify?
Regards,
Graham
--
Re: [VOTE] Adopt the comments.a.o system to the 2.2 and 2.4 branch
of the httpd docs
Posted by Daniel Ruggeri <DR...@primary.net>.
On 7/9/2012 3:20 AM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> I can, to some extent, understand Mads' reasons for voting -1, but I'd
> also like some elaboration, so I don't get the wrong impression.
>
> Personally, my rationale for adopting it to 2.2 and 2.4 is that _people
> will use it_ there, which is what we want. I have described this in the
> wiki proposal a while ago, at
> http://wiki.apache.org/httpd/DocsCommentSystem and I had really hoped
> that all the pros and cons had been discussed by now.
Agreed
[X] +1: Adopt the comments.a.o system in the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of docs
[ ] 0: I don't care
[ ] -1: Don't adopt the system, because....
--
Daniel Ruggeri
Re: [VOTE] Adopt the comments.a.o system to the 2.2 and 2.4 branch
of the httpd docs
Posted by Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk>.
On 07/09/2012 09:24 AM, Issac Goldstand wrote:
> On 09/07/2012 01:12, Mads Toftum wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 08, 2012 at 10:33:56PM +0200, Daniel Gruno wrote:
>>> [ ] +1: Adopt the comments.a.o system in the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of docs
>>> [ ] 0: I don't care
>>> [X] -1: Don't adopt the system, because....
>>>
>> Only trunk is CTR.
>>
> Can you explain the rationale of that veto?
>
Let me reiterate, in case I was being vague earlier on: This is a
_majority_ vote issue just like with releases (and like we did with
adopting the CMS system for our site), there is no veto, just +1, 0 and -1.
I can, to some extent, understand Mads' reasons for voting -1, but I'd
also like some elaboration, so I don't get the wrong impression.
Personally, my rationale for adopting it to 2.2 and 2.4 is that _people
will use it_ there, which is what we want. I have described this in the
wiki proposal a while ago, at
http://wiki.apache.org/httpd/DocsCommentSystem and I had really hoped
that all the pros and cons had been discussed by now.
With regards,
Daniel.
Re: [VOTE] Adopt the comments.a.o system to the 2.2 and 2.4 branch
of the httpd docs
Posted by Issac Goldstand <ma...@beamartyr.net>.
On 09/07/2012 01:12, Mads Toftum wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 08, 2012 at 10:33:56PM +0200, Daniel Gruno wrote:
>> [ ] +1: Adopt the comments.a.o system in the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of docs
>> [ ] 0: I don't care
>> [X] -1: Don't adopt the system, because....
>>
> Only trunk is CTR.
>
Can you explain the rationale of that veto?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Adopt the comments.a.o system to the 2.2 and 2.4 branch
of the httpd docs
Posted by Issac Goldstand <ma...@beamartyr.net>.
On 09/07/2012 01:12, Mads Toftum wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 08, 2012 at 10:33:56PM +0200, Daniel Gruno wrote:
>> [ ] +1: Adopt the comments.a.o system in the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of docs
>> [ ] 0: I don't care
>> [X] -1: Don't adopt the system, because....
>>
> Only trunk is CTR.
>
Can you explain the rationale of that veto?
Re: [VOTE] Adopt the comments.a.o system to the 2.2 and 2.4 branch
of the httpd docs
Posted by Mads Toftum <ma...@toftum.dk>.
On Sun, Jul 08, 2012 at 10:33:56PM +0200, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> [ ] +1: Adopt the comments.a.o system in the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of docs
> [ ] 0: I don't care
> [X] -1: Don't adopt the system, because....
>
Only trunk is CTR.
vh
Mads Toftum
--
http://soulfood.dk
Re: [VOTE] Adopt the comments.a.o system to the 2.2 and 2.4 branch
of the httpd docs
Posted by Issac Goldstand <ma...@beamartyr.net>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
+1
To date, I frequently learn more from comments than I do from docs (not
Apache-specific) so this would be a welcome addition for httpd from my
perspective
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJP+oYAAAoJEDT10PEG7NTzsb4H/R+emwe/eriOs28Scj/W267S
NzodrRe2Z4gvBt0oRqkuREftDRLFFC8MHWbokC4nTg6a8fmA7ENUF009hZ2Pe52L
GOma2A9vPSKGQCRldRS9iOIj38FO9Cf9tlGzJmYDCBZs0CVpolyl4VDeXdiG3T3u
X4Juz0Z29IgUNooANbXSoKsa/R2WvbIVLFD7J3IYUlX5rNIpgWiUTYZxJiZch6bA
yBsoXGszARxgq9XYKMvxV2SRtG0xD0/VuqoFaHz8BmMnbV7s6qjzkCnWC+ZA5X95
IbZ5OYG3hY94/HsuZH9GIQzt/+ELTYcKnMbJbNNVSc88t6bjCalrPpT601YdaU0=
=4a82
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Adopt the comments.a.o system to the 2.2 and 2.4 branch
of the httpd docs
Posted by Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk>.
On 07/08/2012 10:33 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> [X] +1: Adopt the comments.a.o system in the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of docs
> [ ] 0: I don't care
> [ ] -1: Don't adopt the system, because....
>
Forgot to cast my own vote - so there.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Adopt the comments.a.o system to the 2.2 and 2.4 branch
of the httpd docs
Posted by Rainer Jung <ra...@kippdata.de>.
On 08.07.2012 22:33, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> [X] +1: Adopt the comments.a.o system in the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of docs
> [ ] 0: I don't care
> [ ] -1: Don't adopt the system, because....
Thanks for your work on this!
Rainer
Re: [VOTE] Adopt the comments.a.o system to the 2.2 and 2.4 branch
of the httpd docs
Posted by Stefan Fritsch <sf...@sfritsch.de>.
On Sun, 8 Jul 2012, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> [ ] +1: Adopt the comments.a.o system in the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of docs
> [ ] 0: I don't care
> [ ] -1: Don't adopt the system, because....
I am +1 in principle, providing that some issues are fixed:
Currently, it is possible to make comments.a.o send mail to arbitrary
recipients because the email addresses are not verified. IMHO comments.a.o
should only send mail to addresses that have been verified. This would
mean that the email notification service would require an account.
Also, it may be problematic that URLs that lack the protocol part (e.g.
www.spam-now.com) are accepted. But it may be enough if such spam comments
are removed by the moderators (at least if the mail address problem is
solved).
Cheers,
Stefan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Adopt the comments.a.o system to the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of
the httpd docs
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
>
>
> [ x ] +1: Adopt the comments.a.o system in the 2.2 and 2.4 branch of docs
> [ ] 0: I don't care
> [ ] -1: Don't adopt the system, because....
>
--
Rich Bowen
rbowen@rcbowen.com