Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

Update hostname_pattern.rst #7714

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Conversation

atailouloute
Copy link
Contributor

Update some XML examples to remove the horizontal scrollbar and to be coherent with the other examples in the same page

@@ -193,7 +193,8 @@ instance, if you want to match both ``m.example.com`` and
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<routes xmlns="http://symfony.com/schema/routing"
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
xsi:schemaLocation="http://symfony.com/schema/routing http://symfony.com/schema/routing/routing-1.0.xsd">
xsi:schemaLocation="http://symfony.com/schema/routing
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please use https.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I searched on the documentation (all of it), the https is never used in XML examples. Is it normal to do it just in this example ?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think @atailouloute is right. We have literally thousands of these XML URLs and none of them use HTTPS. We recently added HTTPS for every link that points to symfony.com (see #7481) but we left on purpose these links unchanged. The reason is that it could generate lots of conflicts when merging other PRs ... but maybe I'm wrong and changing to HTTPS would create no conflicts. In any case, I think we should decide to do that (or not) in a separate PR. Thanks!

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ok for doing it a specific PR then, but we really should!

Copy link
Contributor

@HeahDude HeahDude left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

👍

Copy link
Member

@javiereguiluz javiereguiluz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

👍

@xabbuh
Copy link
Member

xabbuh commented Apr 1, 2017

Thank you for the many good catches and improvements @atailouloute! To ease the merging of all the small fixes I will combine your PRs in a single PR (see #7737) and merge that one instead.

@xabbuh xabbuh closed this Apr 1, 2017
xabbuh added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 1, 2017
…ULOUTE)

This PR was squashed before being merged into the 2.7 branch (closes #7737).

Discussion
----------

lots of minor tweaks and fixes

This PR contains all the commits from the following pull requests:

* #7641
* #7652
* #7653
* #7666
* #7667
* #7669
* #7673
* #7674
* #7675
* #7677
* #7680
* #7681
* #7710
* #7711
* #7712
* #7713
* #7714
* #7716
* #7717
* #7718
* #7721
* #7722
* #7736

Commits
-------

3d61281 lots of minor tweaks and fixes
@atailouloute atailouloute deleted the patch-6 branch April 1, 2017 12:26
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants