tomcat-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rémy Maucherat <r...@apache.org>
Subject Re: HTTP response reason phrases
Date Wed, 25 Jan 2017 22:40:49 GMT
2017-01-24 20:08 GMT+01:00 Christopher Schultz <chris@christopherschultz.net
>:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> All,
>
> I'm cross-posting dev@ and users@, but please only reply to dev@ if
> you'd like to get involved in this discussion.
>
> I'd like to openly-discuss r1702765 [1]. There have been some
> complaints on both users@ and dev@ and some BZ issues filed against
> Tomcat 8.5 and 9.0 for removing the reason phrase. It happened in
> r1702765 with no referenced BZ issue and was first released with
> Tomcat 8.5.0 -- the initial release of Tomcat 8.5 -- as well as 9.0.0.M1
> .
>
> This issue doesn't really affect me, but some recent conversations
> about the "stability" (in terms of "things not changing") of Tomcat
> have me thinking about the implications of making this change in
> Tomcat 8.5.x and not in just Tomcat 9.0.x.
>
> It is well-known within this community that Tomcat 8.0.x and Tomcat
> 8.5.x are distinct versions, but since the major version number is the
> same, many have expectations that nothing serious is going to change.
> Of course, 8.5.x has *many* serious changes to it with respect to
> Tomcat 8.0.x. But this one seems to be tripping a lot of people up.
>

- 8.5 is already changing a number of things (since it's supposed to be 9,
so it's normal).
- the clients we're talking about are ancient.
- I only saw "a few" people affected, not "a lot".

It's better to avoid breaking things, but I don't see the benefit of
reverting it or bothering with an option.

Rémy

>
> Those who are filing bugs, etc. are quite adamant that the reason
> phrase is "required" for certain things. To be sure, the reason phrase
> will only be required by non-compliant clients, and so technically the
> client is at fault, here.
>
> I'm wondering what the wider community thinks about this change and
> whether or not we should consider reverting it for Tomcat 8.5.x.
>
> Again, please reply to the dev@ list, since that's where this
> discussion belongs. I just wanted to make sure I reached the widest
> audience possible to begin a discussion.
>
> Thanks,
> - -chris
>
> [1] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=r1702765
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
>
> iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJYh6ZCAAoJEBzwKT+lPKRYnJgQAIe57jJw2iUk86I63NGsqPnY
> IKWjZoMuqd8vlczn8/FF/drWMV7ObYsrhsYmJATR5iVI+/xdEXB7n8cMO7B7+ryV
> Sxe1Tcmh/tBNJ83a8C+zSHWvnIELYRonHm9syApa7onPKcsoEe6MTrsdL1M+An9U
> 9IvXtH3BfYKAynze5pkNS6I+ILjgWvNSclJFHmDNHWmRPyqdob4OtMWkSSU3qRBX
> FfbEk9IMrEbIit6CH75dw9xfaUDDRudnw3MBkKaV8VOLUoykvSMK1w9GdufO4ohP
> Dw/+l6CkXl8xCSRcNwXrDdJcisT9gN6Ey7+g7zrgAcg62RP3ftrQMCzT2VDQV3b4
> IlZfTi+vEdsKKzGUdH+OLbN0+hiW0bnuxJmTG2zQSGwKsIh78aFdPKShv4u22XKB
> xfcKn9c6XGUHH88j0ZVSOLh2AmORCvuDfQNA3NJCOceRwQsV1OHAda65fFlkjyiz
> Q/yMMV8VlblGJRItN1nEwheIs9ru3MokRBhaXQ78ehSkRxbkIPawP6ZSiojmv/80
> aKx3/T413GOK4e18sK3XFHP4NowkR7VR/a1R5Py7L2kpzhMJcc4bstYuE9hugfiN
> BaECAT66qahCmP0xVoiFEB2A0+sD0wRKZ6K1gPCarPdLKh6cX4poRcMK4i0jgG2a
> cao/Frb1y8JDm8maw1Q8
> =oQCi
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tomcat.apache.org
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message