httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nick Kew <n...@webthing.com>
Subject Re: svn commit: r798359 - in /httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x: modules/ssl/ssl_engine_init.c modules/ssl/ssl_engine_kernel.c modules/ssl/ssl_engine_vars.c modules/ssl/ssl_util_ssl.c support/ab.c
Date Wed, 29 Jul 2009 00:21:38 GMT

On 28 Jul 2009, at 21:29, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:

> Paul Querna wrote:
>> -1 veto, please revert this commit.
>>
>> Unless I missed something, these changes were not voted on in the
>> STATUS file.  I think wrowe's endorsement was... badly worded.
>
> wrowe's endorsement was fine, and one of three votes required to  
> override
> STATUS flow, so you are right - it's premature.  We would need at  
> least
> a third committer agreeing to apply then test then flush out due to  
> the
> discrepancies between httpd 2.4 and 2.2 mod_ssl code bases.

What do you mean by "override STATUS flow"?  STATUS serves as a
focal point for eyes, and a backport proposal that hasn't appeared in
STATUS has denied folks the proper forum for technical review and
platform for a veto!

> But I'd really rather we didn't kick around patch files due to all  
> of the
> mismatches between trunk and 2.2.

A patch file is something you apply locally, as and when you get
around to reviewing the backport proposal in STATUS.
How is that a problem?

-- 
Nick Kew

Mime
View raw message