Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Minor guide fixes #2713

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Minor guide fixes #2713

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

atezet
Copy link
Member

@atezet atezet commented Jan 25, 2024

No description provided.

@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ values:
| `max_blocking`* | `usize` | Limit on threads to start for blocking tasks. | `512` |
| `ident` | `string`, `false` | If and how to identify via the `Server` header. | `"Rocket"` |
| `ip_header` | `string`, `false` | IP header to inspect to get [client's real IP]. | `"X-Real-IP"` |
| `proxy_proto_header` | `string`, `false` | Header identifying [client to proxy protocol]. | `None` |
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The default is actually None, it's just that you can't set that via TOML.

In general, with the config docs, there's a difficulty in expressing the concepts in such a way that they're not too broad (i.e, too conceptual to the point of being inapplicable) but also not too specific (i.e, they don't obfuscate the concepts entirely and narrow applicability to a single instance). Here, the "default" is something we set in Rust (None), but in this part of the config docs, we're referring largely to the config as TOML while still pointing to the Rust parts of the config. Thus this confusion/issue.

I'd really love to redo the config docs entirely, though I'm not sure what the best approach would be.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I see. I honestly don't think the docs are particularly bad right now (the contrary), I was (apparently) just confused by this specific setting.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Noticed this was still open so rebased the branch, removed the mistaken and kept the tiny fix that was left :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants