I know there is a precedent for mod_rewrite to be acceptable on webmasters.

Are discussions about setup of conf files germane and adhere to the on-topic standards?

This well-formed question one caught my eye:

The Apache instalation of MacOSX is running Ok.

I have tried to create a VirtualHost called test.local, but as soon as I uncomment from /private/etc/apache2/httpd.conf the line

Include /private/etc/apache2/extra/httpd-vhosts.conf , and try to access test.local virtualhost I get an error "You don't have permission to access / on this server".

The VirtualHost configuration in /private/etc/apache2/extra/httpd-vhosts.conf is:

ServerName test.local DocumentRoot "/Users/username/Sites/Test/public" Options Indexes FollowSymLinks Includes AllowOverride All Order allow,deny Allow from all I have also include the VirtualHost in hosts file: test.local

IMHO, I feel these more technical questions are best suited for Serverfault, or Stackexchange.

There's also this one

2 Answers 2


The accepted answer to The mod_rewrite problem still seems like the logical way to delineate (if I do say so myself) but, as you have noted from the How to configure virtual host to consider domain path in Apache question, some of the mods and voters at StackOverflow haven't gotten the memo yet.

For questions like the one you linked, please use the flagging feature to get a moderator's attention.


Another way of delineating could be:

If the webserver is up and running and you're tweaking configuration, then it's Webmasters.

If it's not running properly then it's Serverfault.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .