Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of trawick@gmail.com designates
 66.249.92.175 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=GZpSxm0HBSco7+bxnEkbfMSBY4pZ72UiYIy2cOA1IYyCAeSjnHkNOZyGBpv8AwXIHhbtZiAE5IibOLV0bG3QMnnB30GzClnG8nlaxMZZ6ACtAoYsZhbV6n3OL3HAyFxgSIvjnaU7RFLnDRX/Bgwd5xHYUi3twsnco89STq3aBD4=
Message-ID: <cc67648e0612060637l442e11c7x740efa40c2f5f3d5@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 09:37:10 -0500
From: "Jeff Trawick" <trawick@gmail.com>
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: vote on concept of ServerTokens Off
In-Reply-To: <20061206123026.GA31975@eilebrecht.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <cc67648e0612050339p6c354777u92e316bea9282a1e@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20061206123026.GA31975@eilebrecht.net>

On 12/6/06, Lars Eilebrecht <lars@apache.org> wrote:
> According to Jeff:
>
> > A lot of opinions were offered back in August.  Some were negative but
> > I don't see anything that looks like a veto.
>
> I voted -1 at that time which is a veto.

oops, I didn't read all your messages

--------------veto-----------
I fear that many users of Apache would actually turn off the
Server header for no or for the wrong reasons (which may "harm" our
market share), and therefore I'm -1 on including this patch.
--------------veto-----------

That sounds like the "web server with ego" argument.  Is this going to
make much more difference than netcraft catching Apache hosting parked
domain names one month and IIS the next?

> My opinion hasn't changed and I still think that it is a very
> stupid idea to add a "feature" that allows our users to do
> something which is stupid and absurd.

>*shrug* but as everyone seems to think that this is a good idea,
>feel free to ignore my veto.

Retract the veto, or not.