On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 16:47, Adam Kocoloski <[email protected]> wrote: > Perhaps we could look for the replication doc which includes the port in the > hash content, and if it's a 404 look for the one that does not?
Sounds like we're in agreement.
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 16:47, Adam Kocoloski <[email protected]> wrote: > Perhaps we could look for the replication doc which includes the port in the > hash content, and if it's a 404 look for the one that does not?
Sounds like we're in agreement.