[wp-hackers] Site Address during development

Bjorn Wijers burobjorn at gmail.com
Fri Sep 3 11:23:09 UTC 2010

I support Gavin's proposal of changing WordPress from using absolute to 
relative urls in it's database wholeheartedly. I'm willing to help out 
with patches and testing if someone with commit ability is willing to 
back us up.

I'm pretty certain we can fix this in such a way that content still is 
addressable by one url (as explained by Otto) by making use of the 
already existing WP_SITEURL and WP_HOME constants.

Instead of writing the absolute url to the database we can assemble the 
absolute url on-the-fly and thus make sure all content will have an 
absolute url (for feeds and other purposes).

It seems so easy and I'm probably not the first proposing this. So why 
hasn't this been done yet? Am I missing something?

If so please enlighten me :)


On 09/03/2010 12:20 PM, Gavin Pearce wrote:
> Hi Mike,
> Not a problem.  ;)
> I think the advantages of this would help in many use cases and various
> other CMS platforms already support it.
> If I write the various patches, is there any reason why people would
> vote "against" this change?
> Thanks,
> Gav
> -----Original Message-----
> From: wp-hackers-bounces at lists.automattic.com
> [mailto:wp-hackers-bounces at lists.automattic.com] On Behalf Of Mike
> Little
> Sent: 03 September 2010 10:57
> To: wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> Subject: Re: [wp-hackers] Site Address during development
> On 3 September 2010 10:35, Gavin Pearce<Gavin.Pearce at 3seven9.com>
> wrote:
> Gav,
> Very sorry for attributing that to you, I was viewing both your reply
> and
> ErisDs at the same time when I pressed reply.
>> We all understand that RSS needs absolute URLs, but surely WordPress
>> core could use the wp-config.php or admin area settings when building
>> the URL within feeds, or anywhere an absolute URL is needed?
>> Yes, adds to overheads, but only very, very, very nominally.
> The problem with any perceived problem like this, is that a very small
> minority of WordPress users have this problem (i.e. moving sites), and
> are,
> in this case,  knowledgeable enough to overcome the problem.
> Most WordPress users (11 million plus) do not move their sites, but *do*
> have their sites read through feed readers, aggregated on other sites,
> and
> their podcasts listened to in iTunes.
> So although the vocal developers on this list can see a need, in fact
> their
> use case for the problem is
> a) a very tiny minority, and
> b) only occurs once when a site is moved. All other times it is fine the
> way
> it works now.
> Mike

More information about the wp-hackers mailing list