W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qa-dev@w3.org > January 2004

Re: Problem with SSI in Beta version

From: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2004 22:47:43 +0100
To: QA Dev <public-qa-dev@w3.org>
Message-ID: <r02010000-1032-F2A5212C49FF11D884160030657B83E8@[193.157.66.23]>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org> wrote:

>Any idea which is best for caching? I thought XBitHack Full was the best
>config for that, but I may be wrong.

XBitHack is intended to preserve cacheability, yes. But we can probably
combine it with AddHandler unless Apache is designed to let one kill the
other. Anyone know?

- -- 
When I decide that the situation is unacceptable for me, I'll simply fork
the tree.   I do _not_ appreciate being enlisted into anyone's holy wars,
so unless you _really_ want to go _way_ up in my  personal shitlist don't
play politics in my vicinity.                   -- Alexander Viro on lkml

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP SDK 3.0.3

iQA/AwUBQAr+/qPyPrIkdfXsEQL8BwCeLcuk7ONmyt+YHg+DAoCsN216v8UAnRMX
j3b7QecpAlBlGNcGIf+3x7xO
=mecu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Sunday, 18 January 2004 16:47:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 19 August 2010 18:12:43 GMT