Re: Rev 1: [PATCH] 1.3 TraceEnable [on|off|extended]

2005-06-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > > At 01:40 PM 6/27/2005, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > >At 01:16 PM 6/27/2005, JimJag wrote: > >>Shouldn't set_allow_header be static? > > My bad, make_header was static, and set_allow_header in my > tree is static as well. > > If there are no objections, I would mo

Re: Rev 1: [PATCH] 1.3 TraceEnable [on|off|extended]

2005-06-28 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
At 01:40 PM 6/27/2005, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: >At 01:16 PM 6/27/2005, JimJag wrote: >>Shouldn't set_allow_header be static? My bad, make_header was static, and set_allow_header in my tree is static as well. If there are no objections, I would move ahead and commit. The only thing holding up

Re: Rev 1: [PATCH] 1.3 TraceEnable [on|off|extended]

2005-06-27 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
At 01:16 PM 6/27/2005, JimJag wrote: >Shouldn't set_allow_header be static? ewww. so should have make_allow ... Wasn't defined in any header, so I don't suppose it's really breaking ABI to get it right :) Bill

Re: Rev 1: [PATCH] 1.3 TraceEnable [on|off|extended]

2005-06-27 Thread Jim Jagielski
Shouldn't set_allow_header be static?

Rev 1: [PATCH] 1.3 TraceEnable [on|off|extended]

2005-06-22 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
[Again, this time w/ the attachement] The attached patch resolved the issue I noted below, 10.4.6 405 Method Not Allowed requires an Allow header (I would presume, even if empty, based on #() grammar), while 10.5.2 501 Not Implemented states; This is the appropriate response when the server d

Rev 1: [PATCH] 1.3 TraceEnable [on|off|extended]

2005-06-22 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
The attached patch resolved the issue I noted below, 10.4.6 405 Method Not Allowed requires an Allow header (I would presume, even if empty), while 10.5.2 501 Not Implemented states This is the appropriate response when the server does not recognize the request method and is not capa