On 16/04/07, cactus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I think the behaviour is correct though, why do you want to redefine it ? > > If the behavior is indeed correct, then I don't think I need to > redefine it. > It just seemed odd to return a 'not-modified' response to a query for > a page that did not exist. > > Apache, when configured with mod_expires, does *not* return etags on > 404 responses, but of course does on 200 responses. > > Based upon that, to me it seemed like incorrect behavior.
Correct, but a browser, or a proxy server in the request chain would get the not-modified, only if it already got the correct response once, so essentially what is being said is "the page you're requesting is still not there", with the 404 page you've already sent. It's not stopping you to redefine the behaviour though - you're always free to do that, if you find it odd or inconsistent. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
