Closed Bug 65092 Opened 23 years ago Closed 8 years ago

[meta] HTTP/1.1 compliance

Categories

(Core :: Networking, defect)

Product:
Core
Component:
Networking
Type:
defect
Priority:
Not set
Severity:
normal

Tracking

()

Status:
RESOLVED INCOMPLETE

People

(Reporter: neeti, Unassigned)

References

Details

(Keywords: meta) 

creating meta bug for HTTP/1.1 compliance
Adding bugs to the meta bug
Blocks: 13393, 26638, 34710, 37609, 53100, 58033, 58034, 58037, 58040, 58349
Blocks: 15860
Meta bugs don't block, they depend.
No longer blocks: 13393, 15860, 26638, 34710, 37609, 53100, 58033, 58034, 58037, 58040, 58349
Depends on: 13393, 15860, 26638, 34710, 37609, 53100, 58033, 58034, 58037, 58040, 58349
updated summary to be consistent with other necko meta bugs.
Summary: meta bug for HTTP/1.1 compliance → [meta] HTTP/1.1 compliance
Target Milestone: --- → Future
Depends on: 95549
Removing "[meta]" in summary in favor of keyword.

Changing platform and OS to "All".

Nominating for Mozilla 1.0. HTTP/1.1 compliance should be important for that
release. That said, bug 15860, bug 26638, and bug 34710 don't look like they are
requirements for HTTP/1.1 *compliance*, but instead cover nice-to-have
enhancements that would provide additional support for HTTP/1.1. Perhaps they
should be removed from the dependency list for this bug? (And possibly moved to
a more appropriate meta-bug?)

That leaves us with only one bug actually blocking HTTP/1.1 compliance. (Yea!)
And if this meta-bug is accurate, that puts Mozilla *eerily* close to full
HTTP/1.1 compliance.
Keywords: meta, mozilla1.0
OS: Windows NT → All
Hardware: PC → All
Summary: [meta] HTTP/1.1 compliance → HTTP/1.1 compliance
we are pretty much http/1.1 compliant, but there are many features of http/1.1
that we don't exploit.  there are also several http/1.1 compliance bugs that are
not included on this meta bug.  in particular, we don't properly handle some
http/1.1 cache control headers.

the [meta] summary prefix is how necko meta bugs are tagged.  adding a meta
keyword is fine if that helps you, but please do not remove the [meta] prefix
since people currently use that in their bugzilla queries.
Summary: HTTP/1.1 compliance → [meta] HTTP/1.1 compliance
No longer depends on: 26638
No longer depends on: 34710
Depends on: 48202
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Depends on: 103944
Depends on: 132957
batch: adding topembed per Gecko2 document
http://rocknroll.mcom.com/users/marek/publish/Gecko/Gecko2Tasks.html
Keywords: topembed
Keywords: topembed
Blocks: grouper
Bulk adding topembed keyword.  Gecko/embedding needed.
Keywords: topembed
Keywords: topembed
Should this bug depend on bug 49172, or should another [meta] bug be created for
"full HTTP/1.1 support" (as opposed to minimum compliance, since this appears to
be a "should"), much like bug 7954 collects "outstanding issues for full HTML
4.01 support"?
Would such a collection, if created, contain any other bugs?
Added bug 198309, 205 Reset Content, as a dependancy.
Depends on: 198309
Added bug 8648 and bug 205228, both for 301 Moved Permanently, as dependancies.
Depends on: 8648, 205228
Removed dependencies on bug 8648, bug 198309, bug 205228.

Brian, this meta bug is for tracking HTTP/1.1 *compliance*; not just anything
intelligent the browser could do with HTTP response codes. So to answer your
question, yes, please do create another meta bug if you think other HTTP support
issues warrant tracking that way.
No longer depends on: 8648, 198309, 205228
-> default owner
Assignee: darin → nobody
Status: ASSIGNED → NEW
Component: Networking: HTTP → Networking
QA Contact: tever → networking
Target Milestone: Future → ---
Depends on: 395110
this is down to one bug - we don't need a meta tracker
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 8 years ago
Resolution: --- → INCOMPLETE
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.