* s...@apache.org wrote:
> Author: sf
> Date: Mon Jun 10 21:41:07 2013
> New Revision: 1491612
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1491612
> Log:
> comment
>
> Modified:
> httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
>
> Modified: httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
> URL:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS?rev=149161
>2&r1=1491611&r2=1491612&view=diff
> =========================================================================
>===== --- httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS (original)
> +++ httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS Mon Jun 10 21:41:07 2013
> @@ -198,6 +198,8 @@ PATCHES PROPOSED TO BACKPORT FROM TRUNK:
> trunk patch: http://svn.apache.org/r1491155
> 2.4.x patch: trunk patch works
> nd: why would you do that in a stable branch?
> + sf: Because it is only annoying and serves no purpose anymore. If
> you + want, we can make it a minor MMN bump for adding a "new"
> API. +1: sf, covener
> -1: nd
Long discussions in STATUS are kinda tedious ;-)
Well, I think, such changes are what trunk is for. Why not simply leave
everything below as-is? Even more if it removes only an annoyance? Or is
there a real technical reason I'm just not seeing right now?
nd
--
"Solides und umfangreiches Buch"
-- aus einer Rezension
<http://pub.perlig.de/books.html#apache2>
