Hacker News Reader

Comment by francislavoie | Hacker News Reader

Why would we work on something we don't care about, for free? If they paid a sponsorship, that would allow us (moreso Matt) to spend the time looking into it. Or, people complaining about it can spend their own time finding a solution rather than making noise like this. (Also - I didn't "pore over", I simply searched for "caddyserver.com." in HN's search and it turned up every time two specific individuals brought this up)

View on HN

So maybe other people complaining are not using caddyserver.com domain?

I’ve seen people mentioning about dot at the end of the domain a few times this year. Also never knew is a valid domain and should be able to resolve. Some people mentioned before YouTube.com. Won’t load ads. But I think they fixed.

I've read every single Caddy forum post (up until some months ago where I decided I had to slow down for my mental health), every single Caddy issue in the past 7 years, and nearly every thread mentioning Caddy on HN in the a similar time span, and it's only ever been brought up on HN by exactly two people. I know the patterns and I know how to find those comments. You may be talking about threads not relating to Caddy, in which case I don't find that relevant.

Yes, I didn’t mean related to caddy. Just that dot at the end might not be so unusual like you said. TBH I don’t need this feature. I think it’s hard to be so sure only 2 people on hn mentioned this about caddy, unless you used a lot of resources to dig into it. To clarify I’m not against you, caddy is really amazing, just trying to be objective about it.

Caddy always worked well and recommended to other people. So I’m a pro caddy user, don’t get me wrong.

I am sure, because of how front of mind it has been every time it's been brought up (not just to me, but everyone on the Caddy core team).

We appreciate the recommendations! :)

Ok fine, instead of poring over someone’s comment history why not enjoy some free time?

Because leaving comments like that unaddressed/unclarified does not serve the public reading this thread.

It's served this public to realize that there's obviously some serious flaw somewhere in the software that means fixing this isn't easy, or it would have been done.

Which is sad, as now I have to reconsider.

We've not seen a good enough argument that it's worth our time investigating. This seems like something that only affects something like 0.00001% of users. It may be simple, but it also means extensive testing to make sure any kind of fix doesn't also break other things. With how extensive Caddy's usecases are, we have to be careful with any change, especially low-level ones involving TLS and host matching. We could accidentally introduce somekind of request smuggling security bug for example if proper care isn't taken.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com