Return-Path: 
 <dev-return-80378-apmail-httpd-dev-archive=httpd.apache.org@httpd.apache.org>
X-Original-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3])
	by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 920D010119
	for <apmail-httpd-dev-archive@www.apache.org>;
 Fri,  4 Apr 2014 19:36:33 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 88132 invoked by uid 500); 4 Apr 2014 19:36:22 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@httpd.apache.org
Received: (qmail 87067 invoked by uid 500); 4 Apr 2014 19:36:12 -0000
Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
list-help: <mailto:dev-help@httpd.apache.org>
list-unsubscribe: <mailto:dev-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@httpd.apache.org>
List-Id: <dev.httpd.apache.org>
Delivered-To: mailing list dev@httpd.apache.org
Received: (qmail 86759 invoked by uid 99); 4 Apr 2014 19:36:09 -0000
Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Apr 2014 19:36:09 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0
	tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy)
Received: from [80.12.242.127] (HELO smtp.smtpout.orange.fr) (80.12.242.127)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Apr 2014 19:36:04 +0000
Received: from [192.168.1.12] ([92.140.190.103])
	by mwinf5d40 with ME
	id lvbh1n0042EJ3d003vbhRT; Fri, 04 Apr 2014 21:35:41 +0200
Message-ID: <533F0989.7010408@wanadoo.fr>
Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2014 21:35:37 +0200
From: Marion & Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
 rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r1584582 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
References: <20140404094412.B691123888FE@eris.apache.org>
	<CALK=YjOV4RQ6HSEYzEeqxOYes29c6F_beQT2M7C2RAd+zbSQnw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKQ1sVNx24vtgfg7zRno0zHf0KFjW3pKc3bgOXOcJLN1WYuoBw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAKQ1sVNx24vtgfg7zRno0zHf0KFjW3pKc3bgOXOcJLN1WYuoBw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org


Le 04/04/2014 13:59, Yann Ylavic a �crit :
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:35 PM, Eric Covener <covener@gmail.com> wrote:
>> FYI not necessary to propose docs-only changes in STATUS, they are CTR.
> Oh, I see, thanks for the information.
> Should I (or one) backport it if no one else screams for a while then?
>

Just in case, removal of compatibility notes against 2.3.x has been 
discussed a few months ago.
See http://marc.info/?t=138619128300001&r=1&w=2

No real concensus about it.
I'm still +1 for removing these references.


I'm not sure that the compatibility notes are really consistent in the 
current tree. I am quite sure that some configuration options have been 
added or enhanced without stating in which version it happened.
I have in my TODO list to check, for each 2.4.x releases, which options 
have been added/modified and if the corresponding <compatibility> notes 
have been added in the doc. I've not taken the time yet to go thru all that.

The only example I have in mind right now is r1523242 where the 
'change=no' parameter has been added to 2.4.7.
Doc has been updated in r1523325.


Best regards,
CJ