Re: Wherefor 2.4.36?

2018-10-08 Thread Stefan Eissing
> Am 07.10.2018 um 03:16 schrieb Daniel Ruggeri : > > Actually, I'm glad you asked. I committed after 2.4.35 to T 2.4.36 soon > after. I'm happy to do that ASAP if there are no objections. > > What say you, fellow devs? How about next week? > -- > Daniel Ruggeri > > On October 6, 2018

Re: Wherefor 2.4.36?

2018-10-07 Thread William A Rowe Jr
Since this tag is only days away, the committers would really appreciate any feedback from early adopters. I'm not certain on the status of the auth hook fix, but believe it's certainly ready to have the tires kicked, so we can avoid any quirks resulting from the TLS 1.3 efforts. Please feel free

Re: Wherefor 2.4.36?

2018-10-07 Thread Graham Leggett
On 07 Oct 2018, at 03:16, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: > Actually, I'm glad you asked. I committed after 2.4.35 to T 2.4.36 soon > after. I'm happy to do that ASAP if there are no objections. > > What say you, fellow devs? How about next week? +1 and thank you. Would be good to see TLS 1.3 out the

Re: Wherefor 2.4.36?

2018-10-06 Thread Daniel Ruggeri
Actually, I'm glad you asked. I committed after 2.4.35 to T 2.4.36 soon after. I'm happy to do that ASAP if there are no objections. What say you, fellow devs? How about next week? -- Daniel Ruggeri On October 6, 2018 7:53:58 PM CDT, Michael-Fever wrote: > >Aww, all I care about is getting

Re: Wherefor 2.4.36?

2018-10-06 Thread Michael-Fever
Aww, all I care about is getting 2.4.36 going so I can say I have TLS 1.3 supported with my h2. LOL, no but seriously, is 2.4.36 stable enough to be using? -- Sent from: http://apache-http-server.18135.x6.nabble.com/Apache-HTTP-Server-Dev-f4771363.html

Re: Wherefor 2.4.36?

2018-08-07 Thread Micha Lenk
On 08/06/2018 07:37 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: It appears 2.4.34 is unusable [...] BTW: How usable is it compared to trunk? Regards, Micha ... poking for a 2.6 release.

Re: Wherefor 2.4.36?

2018-08-06 Thread Noel Butler
On 07/08/2018 03:37, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > It appears 2.4.35 is unusable, as other distributors also paused to start > hauling in regression fixes as they eh? unusable? I have rooms full of them with no errors or problems -- Kind Regards, Noel Butler This Email,

Re: Wherefor 2.4.36?

2018-08-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Aug 6, 2018, at 1:37 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > Is anyone else disappointed in the number of regressions in 2.4.35? > Could you point them out?

Re: Wherefor 2.4.36?

2018-08-06 Thread William A Rowe Jr
On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 12:37 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > Is anyone else disappointed in the number of regressions in 2.4.35? > > Is anyone else interested in releasing 2.4.36 promptly with no new > features or enhancements which may cause 2.4.36 to be similarly unusable? > Which backports or

Wherefor 2.4.36?

2018-08-06 Thread William A Rowe Jr
Is anyone else disappointed in the number of regressions in 2.4.35? Is anyone else interested in releasing 2.4.36 promptly with no new features or enhancements which may cause 2.4.36 to be similarly unusable? Which backports or reversions of new code are still needed to get to that point? It