On Fri, 17 Dec 2021, 10:56 Ruediger Pluem, <rpl...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > On 12/17/21 10:54 AM, Joe Orton wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 03:03:13PM +0100, Stefan Eissing wrote: > >> I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release > >> this candidate tarball httpd-2.4.52-rc1 as 2.4.52: > >> [X] +1: It's not just good, it's good enough! > >> [ ] +0: Let's have a talk. > >> [ ] -1: There's trouble in paradise. Here's what's wrong. > >> > >> The computed digests of the tarball up for vote are: > >> sha256: > 296c74a8adde1a8acd6617b21fc3d19719ff4fa39319b2bdbd898aca4d5df97f > *httpd-2.4.52-rc1.tar.gz > >> sha512: > b9012096d6658f7d34a3c655eac31b39ffd439c11de6f3e6e9f309d55f4186a4fb26134eb97522e416ae8ca10ed008a14e96fa01a3e3105d9e547f72e2dc3bc2 > *httpd-2.4.52-rc1.tar.gz > > > > Thanks for RMing, Stefan. > > > > +1 for release, passes test suite on Fedora 35, RHEL 8 and 9 Beta. > > Out of curiosity: On RHEL 9 Beta it works and passes tests against the OS > provided OpenSSL 3? > To be pedantic I am testing against a RHEL9 development snapshot rather than "Beta" though they are quite close, but, yup the tests passed. Regards, Joe >
