Bug#64308: state of #64308

[Joey Hess]

Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
> >CGI::Cookie would lead you to belive it follows RFC 2109, when it says
> >For full information on cookies see
> >http://www.ics.uci.edu/pub/ietf/http/rfc2109.txt
> I wouldn't read this as 'conforms to', nevertheless:
> 
> >CGI::Cookie uses only the old
> >expires field that is in the old netscape cookies spec.
> This is still the case with Perl 5.10.1. Is it still a problem with any
> browser? Should I forward upstream the request to implement 'Max-Age' now?

I don't have comprehensive knowledge of every browser. The current
version of lynx has support for the expires field (in addition to
Max-Age).

I'd still appreciate it if perl followed the actual RFC, even if every
browser has support for the old spec.

-- 
see shy jo
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 828 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/perl-maintainers/attachments/20091016/dd615ecf/attachment.pgp>