httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rainer Jung <rainer.j...@kippdata.de>
Subject Re: svn commit: r1371932 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
Date Sat, 11 Aug 2012 13:20:17 GMT
On 11.08.2012 14:43, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> On 08/11/2012 02:37 PM, humbedooh@apache.org wrote:
>> Author: humbedooh
>> Date: Sat Aug 11 12:37:15 2012
>> New Revision: 1371932
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1371932&view=rev
>> Log:
>> Comment
>>
>> Modified:
>>      httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
>>
>> Modified: httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS?rev=1371932&r1=1371931&r2=1371932&view=diff
>> ==============================================================================
>> --- httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS (original)
>> +++ httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS Sat Aug 11 12:37:15 2012
>> @@ -149,6 +149,8 @@ PATCHES PROPOSED TO BACKPORT FROM TRUNK:
>>        2.4.x patch: Trunk patch works (*provided the authz provider gets backported)
>>        +1: humbedooh, rjung
>>        rjung: docs missing?
>> +     humbedooh: It's in the 2.4 docs already, but commented out, as with a lot
>> +                of other functions that were never actually made. It's a mess ;)
>>
>>      * mod_auth_digest: respect DefaultRuntimeDir for its
>>                         unconfigurable shared memory file
>>
>>
> I'll be quick, as I'm needed elsewhere. Rainer, the mod_lua docs are a
> bit of a mess, since the original implementation of mod_lua was not done
> properly. A lot of "Gee, if only we had this" documentation made it past
> to the 2.4 docs, and have since been commented out. As a result, there's
> no real patch from trunk to 2.4, since the documentation already exists
> in both documents, in different forms.
>
> I'll personally make sure that whenever something does get backported,
> the documentation is then made up-to-date. I hope that's good enough :)
> Mostly, this just involves uncommenting a section.

Thanks, sounds good to me.

Regards,

Rainer


Mime
View raw message