| FazBrowse GitHub Viewer | Trending | | Home |
| Tools: [Download Repo ZIP] [Original HTTPS Page] |
Sorry, something went wrong.
…servers Prior to issue python#120485 these servers did not allow port reuse, which makes sense as the behavior of port reuse is surprising if you're not expecting it. It's unclear to me why these services were switched to allow port reuse, but I believe the desired behavior (unless subclasses opt in) is to not allow port reuse. See also: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323170
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
This needs a backport to 3.14, right? |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Thanks @jeremycline for the PR, and @vsajip for merging it 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.14. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
…servers (pythonGH-135405) Prior to issue pythonGH-120485 these servers did not allow port reuse, which makes sense as the behavior of port reuse is surprising if you're not expecting it. It's unclear to me why these services were switched to allow port reuse, but I believe the desired behavior (unless subclasses opt in) is to not allow port reuse. See also: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323170 (cherry picked from commit 2bd3895) Co-authored-by: Jeremy Cline <jeremycline@linux.microsoft.com>
|
GH-135538 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.14 branch. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
…servers (pythonGH-135405) Prior to issue python#120485 these servers did not allow port reuse, which makes sense as the behavior of port reuse is surprising if you're not expecting it. It's unclear to me why these services were switched to allow port reuse, but I believe the desired behavior (unless subclasses opt in) is to not allow port reuse. See also: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323170
…servers (pythonGH-135405) Prior to issue python#120485 these servers did not allow port reuse, which makes sense as the behavior of port reuse is surprising if you're not expecting it. It's unclear to me why these services were switched to allow port reuse, but I believe the desired behavior (unless subclasses opt in) is to not allow port reuse. See also: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323170
…servers (pythonGH-135405) Prior to issue python#120485 these servers did not allow port reuse, which makes sense as the behavior of port reuse is surprising if you're not expecting it. It's unclear to me why these services were switched to allow port reuse, but I believe the desired behavior (unless subclasses opt in) is to not allow port reuse. See also: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323170
…servers (pythonGH-135405) Prior to issue python#120485 these servers did not allow port reuse, which makes sense as the behavior of port reuse is surprising if you're not expecting it. It's unclear to me why these services were switched to allow port reuse, but I believe the desired behavior (unless subclasses opt in) is to not allow port reuse. See also: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323170
…servers (pythonGH-135405) Prior to issue python#120485 these servers did not allow port reuse, which makes sense as the behavior of port reuse is surprising if you're not expecting it. It's unclear to me why these services were switched to allow port reuse, but I believe the desired behavior (unless subclasses opt in) is to not allow port reuse. See also: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323170
| Back | FazBrowse Home | New Git URL |
Prior to issue #120485 these servers did not allow port reuse, which makes sense as the behavior of port reuse is surprising if you're not expecting it. It's unclear to me why these services were switched to allow port reuse, but I believe the desired behavior (unless subclasses opt in) is to not allow port reuse.
See also: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323170