Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of dirkx@webweaving.org designates
 209.132.96.45 as permitted sender)
Message-Id: <B0531A1B-306D-4AAA-8B47-C9B266309327@webweaving.org>
From: Dirk-Willem van Gulik <dirkx@webweaving.org>
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
In-Reply-To: <47B1BBB9.9040304@rowe-clan.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v915)
Subject: Re: Script to create ca-bundle.crt
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:40:08 +0100
References: <47A03BE8.10701@gmail.com>
 <rVOqrdGJHsKVgzoYDi7WKqYXrL7AFfdQJm8KYen1HdO@akmail>
 <47B1BBB9.9040304@rowe-clan.net>


On Feb 12, 2008, at 4:31 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:

> Guenter Knauf wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I was recently hacking on a script to create ca-bundle.crt:
>> http://curl.haxx.se/lxr/source/lib/mk-ca-bundle.pl
>> after I had finished my script I found that Joe already hacked a  
>> very similar script 3 years ago, and offered to the OpenSSL project:
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/modssl-users@modssl.org/msg16980.html
>> unfortunately it seems that this script is only in CVS, and not  
>> distributed with AP 1.3 mod_ssl...
>> I would like to contribute my script to httpd if there's some  
>> agreement;
>> I have sucessfully tested my script on a couple of Linux hosts  
>> (also with older Perl 5.0005), on Win32 running ActivePerl, and on  
>> NetWare; and with OpenSSL 0.9.7 and 0.9.8 (where the OpenSSL  
>> commandline is only needed for optional text output).
>> I've though no idea where it should live; probably in the ./test  
>> folder?
>
> I'm wondering "why test/?" (goes for Dirk's as well).

Two days ago I would have expressed strong disagreement. To my  
surprize - the feedback I got where from people who seem to be using  
these sort of scripts not for just testing code (as I had intended)  
but as the starting point for their deployments and to generate their  
files.

> ...if it's very general for admins - why not support/ ?

Agreed,

Dw