Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <C0DC8FCB-929F-4866-A396-A59E94336DEB@jaguNET.com>
References: <20170411042534.99A8C3A0597@svn01-us-west.apache.org>
 <CACsi252pUveSoUtZFAzXnUYFs+VML-4ZsyTF=AdCUG5DWpocvQ@mail.gmail.com> <C0DC8FCB-929F-4866-A396-A59E94336DEB@jaguNET.com>
From: William A Rowe Jr <wrowe@rowe-clan.net>
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 08:14:32 -0500
Message-ID: <CACsi2530UDDGHR5cOOpLbiDf+f8LTRuq225GP1apM=PcFj7aNg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: svn commit: r1790917 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
To: httpd <dev@httpd.apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
archived-at: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 13:14:45 -0000

On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 6:32 AM, Jim Jagielski <jim@jagunet.com> wrote:
> /me confused. Why the -1 again? Are you having problems
> building brotli? Or is it that you don't like how
> brotli is being built? Or what?

The docs were a mess - issues I had address on dev@. Until Monday,
 after you had removed my vote.

They are in quite a better place now.

I don't find brotli-0.6.0 + httpd buildable without additional docs
that weren't coming from either package. Once again, we are back
to slapdash feature-injection-without-docs bugs in httpd "stable".

However, It seems the issue is recognized upstream and we may
have a fix very shortly.

   https://github.com/google/brotli/issues/539

Looking forward to pulling my negative vote, myself, when this comes
to pass.