tonynelson at georgeanelson.com
Fri Mar 9 05:08:47 CET 2007
At 2:16 PM -0500 3/8/07, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
>At 11:53 AM 3/8/2007 +0100, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>>That assumes there is a need for the old functionality. I really don't
>>see it (pje claimed he needed it once, but I remain unconvinced, not
>>having seen an actual fragment where the old behavior is helpful).
>The code in question was a type association handler that looked up loader
>functions based on file extension. This was specifically convenient for
>recognizing the difference between .htaccess files and other dotfiles that
>might appear in a web directory tree -- e.g. .htpasswd. The proposed
>change of splitext() would break that determination, because .htpasswd and
>.htaccess would both be considered files with empty extensions, and would
>be handled by the "empty extension" handler.
So, ".htaccess" and "foo.htaccess" should be treated the same way? Is that
what Apache does?
TonyN.:' <mailto:tonynelson at georgeanelson.com>
More information about the Python-Dev