[Pulp-dev] Webserver owning the entire url namespace?

[Dennis Kliban]

On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 5:19 PM, Brian Bouterse <bbouters at redhat.com> wrote:

> We're looking at developing apache/nginx scripts, and I was thinking about
> documenting the webserver requirements. I think Pulp probably has to be
> rooted at / on any given site so that it can host live APIs. Users can
> still vhost multiple sites at other hostnames so I think it's ok, but I'm
> interested in what others think. I wrote this up here [0] for some
> discussion on the issue.
>
>
I like Pulp owning all the URLs for a hostname. This enables plugin writers
to provide any API endpoints they need without having to deploy a separate
WSGI application.

Was there any good reason why this was not done for Pulp 2?



> [0]: https://pulp.plan.io/issues/3114
>
> -Brian
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20171103/b2a82432/attachment.htm>