use SERVER_NAME to set host and port in app.run()

[r0fls]

Addresses #2109

[r0fls]

Yikes, thanks @jeffwidman. Any pointers on tests we could write to catch some of these types of situations?

[davidism]

Is there a reason you didn't include the "set SEVER_NAME from run" part of the issue? It would require some more thought because you can't set the config to some values such as 0.0.0.0 (even though you shouldn't be running with that anyway).

[davidism]

Posted this in the linked issue, but note that this won't and can't apply to the flask run command, which is the recommended way to run the dev server.

[jeffwidman]

I haven't looked at the original issue in depth, but you got me curious on how to use partition properly... played with it and looks like something like this would properly handle the double fallback from app.run to SERVER_NAME to the built-in default. And it does it separately for both host and port values so you can specify one or the other or both:

_host = '127.0.0.1'
_port = 5000
server_name = self.config.get("SERVER_NAME")
if server_name:
    _sn_host, _, _sn_port = server_name.partition(':')
host = host or _sn_host or _host
port = int(port or _sn_port or _port)

@r0fls Feel free to use as much or as little of this as you want. I just really liked the clean/linear way your original implementation walked through the configs, so I'd hate to see your solution get too cluttered up...

[r0fls]

Should I rebase to 1 commit at this point, or does that not matter?

[jeffwidman]

👍

(Of course, I did say LGTM when it was broken, so take my review with a grain of salt)

[davidism]

Not sure why the Python 2.6 tests started failing, but it seems unrelated.

[r0fls]

Ya, it looks to be a message saying 2.6 is no longer supported or maintained by the core devs.

[untitaker]

That is true but Flask still supports it. However, it appears that coverage.py no longer does.

[untitaker]

This needs a testcase and changelog.

[davidism]

Done.

Re: 2.6, it was fixed in Coverage earlier today, tests pass again. https://coverage.readthedocs.io/en/coverage-4.3.4/changes.html#version-4-3-4-2017-01-17

[john-bodley]

@davidism I was wondering whether the docstring for the host param should now reflect the updated behavior, i.e. similar to port,

... or the host defined in the SERVER_NAME config variable if present.

[jeffwidman]

That is probably a good idea, do you want to open a PR?