Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > > I'm not sure what the policy is here (this is really up to Greg as > RM), but if 2.0.28 makes it to beta (which I think it has with > three +1s), can we add that patch that fixes the header filters > with ap_die into the beta tarball (modules/http/http_request.c)?
I don't know what the policy is either. I've been trying to come up with a method of including that fix in some way that wouldn't confuse people or cause harm. > I know that we can't touch the 2.0.28-alpha tarball, but I seem > to recall someone saying we could touch the next-level tarball > (i.e. -beta). hmmmm...that's an interesting idea. I like it! I would bump the tag on that file, do the PITA dance with the CHANGES file, probably do a little testing, re-roll, rename the tarballs as beta. What do others think? I could note that this happened in the CHANGES file since I have to mess with it anyway. I'm assuming that Austin's build problem isn't a showstopper. He's on Linux, right? Greg
