Re: [Duplicity-talk] Anyone using duplicity with box.net (webdavs)?

[SanskritFritz]

On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 11:07 AM,  <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 29.02.2012 10:37, SanskritFritz wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 9:57 AM,  <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> as this isn't the first time that listbody modding helped and i am also 
>>> interested in box.net anybody disagreeing in making the listbody host 
>>> aware, meaning switching known to work listbodies by host name?
>>
>> Host aware? Wouldn't it be better to make it webdav server-version aware 
>> rather?
>>
>
> then we'd have to issue an initial request to the server just to determine 
> the server software, if it is chatty enough it'll tell us in the http 
> headers, but still have to be parsed properly. i am not into webdav, so i 
> don't know if there is a way to properly ask a server what software/version 
> it is in case the headers are useless.
>
> but seeing all these different implementations i'd bet that going by hostname 
> (say second level domainbased e.g. box.net) assuming they don't use different 
> implementations in their loadbalancing should be quite easy and safe to 
> implement.

So you imagine the hosts list holding the exceptions to the default
server behaviour? Because I'm afraid such list could otherwise grow
pretty large with all the free and nonfree offerings around. Also, who
would maintain such a list?