On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 5:39 AM, Lars Eilebrecht <l...@apache.org> wrote:
> William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
> > Except that in this case, between Lars offer to "ignore" his vote/veto,
> and
> > the fact that he hasn't responded in 21 months (I also emailed him
> directly
> > last week to ensure he made note of this thread), he apparently does not
> > feel strongly enough to either confirm his veto, or confirm his
> willingness
> > to be talked out of this veto. Jeff asked for explicit confirmation or
> > retraction of this veto on Dec 6th 2006, and Lars had not responded, so
> it
> > appears we can move ahead as this statement above appeared to be half-way
> > retracted veto, and he's unwilling to comment further to either agree
> with
> > Jim, or explicitly vote -0/distasteful.
>
> My apologies for not responding earlier, but I was busy moving from
> Munich to London last week ...
>
> As far as I remember, Mads Toftum also voted with a -1.
> My -1 hasn't changed as I still feel very strongly about this for reasons
> already discussed back in 2006 (and once in 2004 or 2005 when the
> same discussion came up).
>
> Given two -1s and many people voting -0 I'm wondering why we are still
> discussing this topic?
>
Because somebody committed code to disable Server or set it to an arbitrary
value...
*) ServerTokens now accepts 'Off' which disables sending of
Server: header and sets SERVER_SOFTWARE to empty. It also accepts
'Set' which allows the user to specify any string as the Server:
name.
