httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <...@jaguNET.com>
Subject Re: svn commit: r1491612 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
Date Fri, 14 Jun 2013 17:30:29 GMT

On Jun 14, 2013, at 1:20 PM, Eric Covener <covener@gmail.com> wrote:

>> Of course. That's not the question (at least IMO). The question
>> is that when a cosmetic change also results in a functional
>> change (and we wouldn't be suggesting MMN bumps if it wasn't),
>> that it becomes a change that should be proposed as a backport
>> and not willy-nilly added. We have a process, and should
>> discourage attempts to bypass it on a stable trunk.
> 
> This change followed the process. It currently sits in 2.4.x/STATUS.

I know... I voted on it :)

I was speaking in generalities... sorry for the confusion.

Mime
View raw message