httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ruediger Pluem <>
Subject Re: Patching PR#13986
Date Wed, 26 Sep 2007 16:05:39 GMT

On 09/26/2007 05:14 PM, Joshua Slive wrote:
> On 9/26/07, Nick Kew <> wrote:
>> We really need to fix this issue of inappropriate DefaultTypes.
>> An approach that deals with this without loss of back-compatibility
>> is to hand the decision to systems administrators:
>> #to suppress setting content-type when the server has no information
>> DefaultType !
> +1 on concept, but I'd prefer DefaultType none, which is more readable
> and I believe equally unlikely to show up in a real content-type.

Also +1 on concept, but

1. I am unsure if it is ok to sent parts of a multipart/byteranges response
   without a Content-type. RFC2616 19.2 says:

   "The multipart/byteranges media type includes two or more parts, each with its
   own Content-Type and Content-Range fields."

   OTOH the words MUST and SHOULD are not used here.

2. Remove the tabs from the patch ;-)



View raw message