On 28 Jul 2009, at 21:29, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Paul Querna wrote:
-1 veto, please revert this commit.
Unless I missed something, these changes were not voted on in the
STATUS file. I think wrowe's endorsement was... badly worded.
wrowe's endorsement was fine, and one of three votes required to
override
STATUS flow, so you are right - it's premature. We would need at
least
a third committer agreeing to apply then test then flush out due to
the
discrepancies between httpd 2.4 and 2.2 mod_ssl code bases.
What do you mean by "override STATUS flow"? STATUS serves as a
focal point for eyes, and a backport proposal that hasn't appeared in
STATUS has denied folks the proper forum for technical review and
platform for a veto!
But I'd really rather we didn't kick around patch files due to all
of the
mismatches between trunk and 2.2.
A patch file is something you apply locally, as and when you get
around to reviewing the backport proposal in STATUS.
How is that a problem?
--
Nick Kew
