On Friday 18 January 2013, Jim Jagielski wrote:
t/apache/http_strict.t ... 1/85 # Failed test 25 in
t/apache/http_strict.t at line 172 fail #15 # Failed test 26 in
t/apache/http_strict.t at line 172 fail #16
Should tests really fail when there's no real
failure per se??
Maybe commiting
On 1/18/2013 9:31 AM, cove...@apache.org wrote:
@@ -218,6 +218,7 @@ PATCHES PROPOSED TO BACKPORT FROM TRUNK:
trunk patch: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revisionrevision=1433478
2.4.x patch:
http://people.apache.org/~druggeri/patches/AuthLDAPBindPasswordExec-2.4.patch
+1:
On 1/17/2013 6:52 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
*ping* :)
(yeah, I am kinda pushing/hoping for the balancer
stuff to be in 2.4.4 in time for ACNA13)
*pong* :)
I'm hoping to review those last two on Monday. Been trying for two weeks
to get to them!
--
Daniel Ruggeri
Hi,
cgi_handler() in 2.2 contains these lines. For trunk they look very similar.
if (!nph) {
const char *location;
char sbuf[MAX_STRING_LEN];
int ret;
if ((ret = ap_scan_script_header_err_brigade(r, bb, sbuf))) {
ret = log_script(r, conf, ret,
Hello dear dev@,
I'd like to propose that we rewrite and rethink modules.apache.org.
For those of you who detest long emails (henceforth known as the
TL;DRs), just scroll to the bottom for a quick summary.
While modules.a.o does provide a mediocre service to those looking for a
module, I'd like
