From dev-return-18763-apmail-apr-dev-archive=apr.apache.org@apr.apache.org Mon Aug 13 19:07:39 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 68958 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2007 19:07:38 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 13 Aug 2007 19:07:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 4260 invoked by uid 500); 13 Aug 2007 19:07:36 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 3870 invoked by uid 500); 13 Aug 2007 19:07:35 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 3859 invoked by uid 99); 13 Aug 2007 19:07:35 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 13 Aug 2007 12:07:35 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [140.211.11.9] (HELO minotaur.apache.org) (140.211.11.9) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Mon, 13 Aug 2007 19:07:47 +0000 Received: (qmail 68890 invoked by uid 2161); 13 Aug 2007 19:07:13 -0000 Received: from [192.168.2.4] (euler.heimnetz.de [192.168.2.4]) by cerberus.heimnetz.de (Postfix on SuSE Linux 7.0 (i386)) with ESMTP id D44DC1721C for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2007 21:06:21 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <46C0ABB5.2040704@apache.org> Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 21:06:29 +0200 From: Ruediger Pluem User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.6) Gecko/20070802 SeaMonkey/1.1.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@apr.apache.org Subject: Re: Roll 0.9.15 this week? References: <46BFEE47.4030602@rowe-clan.net> In-Reply-To: <46BFEE47.4030602@rowe-clan.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 08/13/2007 07:38 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > Jim's spearheaded an effort to release httpd-2.0.60 and we've > discovered a set of socket issues that need to be corrected by > apr-0.9.15. How do we plan to address these? Like in 1.2.x by reverting the backports (which seems to make sense to me given the comments in r473681, http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=473681)? Or should we backport r447894? I am happy to proceed either way with a preference of reverting. Regards Rüdiger