Re: svn commit: r798359 - in /httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x: modules/ssl/ssl_engine_init.c modules/ssl/ssl_engine_kernel.c modules/ssl/ssl_engine_vars.c modules/ssl/ssl_util_ssl.c support/ab.c

[Peter Sylvester]

William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:

Paul Querna wrote:

-1 veto, please revert this commit.

Unless I missed something, these changes were not voted on in the
STATUS file.  I think wrowe's endorsement was... badly worded.

wrowe's endorsement was fine, and one of three votes required to override
STATUS flow, so you are right - it's premature.  We would need at least
a third committer agreeing to apply then test then flush out due to the
discrepancies between httpd 2.4 and 2.2 mod_ssl code bases.

But I'd really rather we didn't kick around patch files due to all of the
mismatches between trunk and 2.2.

/I think it would be a good idea to plan a release together with
openssl 1.0.0, at least //when openssl 1.0.0 comes out, mod_ssl
should be compilable./
/
Concerning the differences, I can see several categories:

- changes due to stricter rules in openssl, this concerns  the
 mentioned patches, in fact the 'const' and 'stack' stuff. This
 doesn't change any functionality. Not a big deal that
 this backport was forgotten in 2.2.12.

- "simple" corrections and functional additions in the trunk.
 some may be worth to be backported.

- complex additions like sni, ocsp, locks, ... may be a
 problem IF the underlying 0.9.8x and 1.0.0 code behave
 differently, but so far I don't really see this, it is more likely
 that some features in the trunk is not considered
 sufficiently mature.

Thanks for reading
have fun.
Peter













/