Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5780E200D57 for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 11:08:37 +0100 (CET) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 5600B160C13; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 10:08:37 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id A2D1B160C10 for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 11:08:36 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 79692 invoked by uid 500); 11 Dec 2017 10:08:35 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 79682 invoked by uid 99); 11 Dec 2017 10:08:35 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd3-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 10:08:35 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd3-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd3-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id E17B618061A for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 10:08:34 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd3-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.102 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.102 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd3-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=greenbytes.de header.b=LqAFtPvT; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=greenbytes.de header.b=PakpIRg1 Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd3-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.10]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KsrOp3MrqwPt for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 10:08:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.greenbytes.de (mail.greenbytes.de [217.91.35.233]) by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 3C8155FAF9 for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 10:08:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.greenbytes.de (Postfix, from userid 117) id 1F29B15A41B6; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 11:08:26 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=greenbytes.de; s=mail; t=1512986906; bh=tS9nDUj52ZN1VA7Ly9NxLJUT1Lx8IO99EZHdYRyblUU=; h=From:Subject:Date:References:To:In-Reply-To:From; b=LqAFtPvTAutcbHI/tvDZ9KRwXJnCi5Q2O0H+s/sIzBCwJhiY/z75mwmOD0npZSQfE zIxrmz7LfkMGAOujnDnGZWHJGhzZ3/687P0Zr0owgMa1l4f/eSZR8nB8nnnbDFgVKy Z52+A/h/V/HNcjC7SYWLRcMQVNVm0r7tgkv9dq7Y= Received: from resistance.greenbytes.local (unknown [217.91.35.233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.greenbytes.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A933E15A41B4 for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 11:08:25 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=greenbytes.de; s=mail; t=1512986905; bh=tS9nDUj52ZN1VA7Ly9NxLJUT1Lx8IO99EZHdYRyblUU=; h=From:Subject:Date:References:To:In-Reply-To:From; b=PakpIRg1wXepPxvb5OSA7Bbk3kX/fskzSq2Lgt7X3iE2p7wFHvOfkW+TS1baynfrv 9VTGO5FWfLTPAsPfV1MpQEv0BpftgpzrRJonPP6dpHxgX3hIXDhz1EVlEyyfhrV+ga n7KUGa+pc9zK2zp/N5JUZvtFmj3iBCxKcbzTzFQ8= From: Stefan Eissing Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.2 \(3445.5.20\)) Subject: Re: mod_md and ManagedDomain Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 11:08:25 +0100 References: <463DAA1F-5DE5-4AD4-B701-62B3386DF70D@greenbytes.de> To: dev@httpd.apache.org In-Reply-To: Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.5.20) archived-at: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 10:08:37 -0000 > Am 08.12.2017 um 19:35 schrieb William A Rowe Jr = : >=20 > On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 8:03 AM, Luca Toscano = wrote: >> Maybe ManagedDomain and , as iiuc we are going = to use >> for SSLPolicy? >=20 > Just an observation, = http://httpd.apache.org/docs/trunk/mod/quickreference.html > illustrated that we have no verbs in
directive block > titles, thus far. >=20 > or followed by ManagedDomainSet > or MDPolicyElect or something similar seems more in keeping with the > existing naming convention for directives. Bothers me when we overload > with yet one additional naming scheme, that would probably bother our > users more than confusing directive names. There are important questions on how we progress the design of the = server. I=20 have asked for participation and feedback on the design of ACME support = in httpd since April. Shoulder clapping, "go ahead!", "fine!". Answers to design questions: not really Requests for opinion about a "restart" feature: 0 Code request for a Windows Service restart call: 0 Request of a serf based implementation of the http client: 0 Feedback from testing by the team: 0 Opinions about renaming parts/the whole thing just days before a possible release to users who want this: +7 You got to be kiddding me! Cheers, Stefan