On 7/14/10 16:19 , Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
Log message for revision 114741:
- LP #143533: Instead of showing 0.0.0.0 as server name when no
specific listening IP is configured for the HTTP server, do a
socket lookup to show the current server's fully qualified name.
Can I object to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 7/14/10 16:28 , Wichert Akkerman wrote:
On 7/14/10 16:19 , Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
Log message for revision 114741:
- LP #143533: Instead of showing 0.0.0.0 as server name when no
specific listening IP is configured for the HTTP server,
On 7/14/10 16:43 , Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 7/14/10 16:28 , Wichert Akkerman wrote:
On 7/14/10 16:19 , Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
Log message for revision 114741:
- LP #143533: Instead of showing 0.0.0.0 as server name when no
specific
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
I don't mind doing this for a SERVER_NAME in the response, but looking
at the diff from the commit email you also changed the startup message
from Zope 2 with this change. That is the bit I find problematic: I want
to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 7/14/10 17:00 , Andreas Jung wrote:
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
I don't mind doing this for a SERVER_NAME in the response, but looking
at the diff from the commit email you also changed the startup message
from Zope 2 with this change. That is
On 7/14/10 17:14 , Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 7/14/10 17:00 , Andreas Jung wrote:
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
I don't mind doing this for a SERVER_NAME in the response, but looking
at the diff from the commit email you also changed the startup
