Cannot send Accept-Encoding with net::http #91
Comments
rgalanakis
added a commit
to webhookdb/webhookdb
that referenced
this issue
Nov 5, 2024
Some servers REQUIRE text/calendar in 'Accept', so add it before '*/*'. Also fix a problem where Down was setting Accept-Encoding header to '', which meant we usually weren't getting zipped encoding. This was fixed by using down/httpx instead of down/http. However this change ended up requiring a whole bunch of other small changes since the Down backends do not work so consistently. See janko/down#91
rgalanakis
added a commit
to webhookdb/webhookdb
that referenced
this issue
Nov 5, 2024
Some servers REQUIRE text/calendar in 'Accept', so add it before '*/*'. Also fix a problem where Down was setting Accept-Encoding header to '', which meant we usually weren't getting zipped encoding. This was fixed by using down/httpx instead of down/http. However this change ended up requiring a whole bunch of other small changes since the Down backends do not work so consistently. See janko/down#91
rgalanakis
added a commit
to webhookdb/webhookdb
that referenced
this issue
Nov 5, 2024
Some servers REQUIRE text/calendar in 'Accept', so add it before '*/*'. Also fix a problem where Down was setting Accept-Encoding header to '', which meant we usually weren't getting zipped encoding. This was fixed by using down/httpx instead of down/http. However this change ended up requiring a whole bunch of other small changes since the Down backends do not work so consistently. See janko/down#91
rgalanakis
added a commit
to webhookdb/webhookdb
that referenced
this issue
Nov 6, 2024
Some servers REQUIRE text/calendar in 'Accept', so add it before '*/*'. Also fix a problem where Down was setting Accept-Encoding header to '', which meant we usually weren't getting zipped encoding. This was fixed by using down/httpx instead of down/http. However this change ended up requiring a whole bunch of other small changes since the Down backends do not work so consistently. See janko/down#91
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
See this commit: 8623385#diff-e9b8a9ac06b9fed71d2486fb9ee9ad12bddaca2e7f51290640f5c3722d5b7a20R256
Is this workaround still needed?
I suspect it's also related to #87
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: