mod_proxy_html was moved into apache core as of version 2.4 of Apache but is not included in the apache 2.4 package nor is a separate ap24_mod_proxy_http available. https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/mod/mod_proxy_html.html
My $0.02.. It should *NOT* be enabled by default. It should be available as an option but not as a default.... mod_proxy has caused a number of security issues in the past with default deployments and default configurations.
I agree with Michelle Sullivan. Mod_proxy should not be enabled by default but the mod_proxy_html.so module should be included with the base install (or an an additional package that can be installed) of Apache 2.4.
There are also certain out of the box expectations that users naturally have (per tutorials, documentation etc out there in the world), that we need to consider when we make decisions. POLA is still important, and this issue is a case in point, the result of a user (Ean, thank you!) asking the question in #FreeBSD on IRC. There *is* a net overhead (mostly immeasurable) of special/snowflake installations that are not the same as what upstreams provide.
Per default apache24 builds all modules not depending on other ports. (reflecting ./configure --enable-modules=most plus some addionals) I'm looking forward for sub packages (not slave ports) in the form to fire one build and create several packages (similar to rpm build). When we have this in the framework, it would be possible to build apache24 and get the following additional packages apache24-(watchdog echo data reflector charset_lite xml2enc proxy_html ...). But at the moment the Framework has no support for sub packages, and all documentation I've seen installing the additional packages on top of apache24 (httpd in linux world).
Close this PR, the default OPTION was changed to include proxy_html and xml2enc as default in commit ports r413035 (Makefile.options)