Use of non-standard port numbers in sites running Dreamwidth code

[pauamma]

Currently, Dreamwidth supports (somewhat half-heartedly and clumsily) sites with user-visible URLs that look like http://www.example.com:6809/, and I've been wondering about a few things:

1- How many sites running Dreamwidth code actually use that feature? How many couldn't run without it?

2- If you're considering running a Dreamwidth-based site or are working on one, would it or does it need that feature to run?

3- If neither of the above applies to you, do you find that feature important, pleasant, infuriating, or neither? Why?

(Note: I'm not speaking of hosted Dreamhacks here, since even those that use another port internally are mapped to port 80 using Perlbal.)

Comments

[afuna]

Hmm, does it actually work? I was under the impression that that doesn't work at all currently (we have http://bugs.dwscoalition.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1895 for that)

[pauamma]

It works if you don't care about user email aliases, I think.

[afuna]

Hmm. I can't quite recall what was wrong, but I think that I was getting 404s on the user-space pages when there was a port in them, but that might have been my trying to set the wrong variables.

[foxfirefey]

The one thing I can think it being really useful for is for people doing dev stuff on home machines. Sometimes internet providers block port 80.

[pauamma]

Hmm, yes. But would someone using that setup care about user emails? I think that's the part that doesn't work with nonstandard port #s.

[azurelunatic]

Or sites with large enough populations who can't get there on 80 that they have to offer it on both 80 and another port that, say, nannyware is less likely to object to.

[pauamma]

Do you know of anyone who actually runs such a site? I was hoping to get "I'm running a site using Dreamwidth code and I do/don't need that feature" answers.

[skakri]

Hmm, well, I do run a public DW installation, but I guess that it's a "nice to have" possibility for testing/hacking purposes (I think that I should run a separate installation as well, for testing/development). Just my 2 cents.