On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 3:17 PM, Jim Jagielski <[email protected]> wrote: > My only suggestion is that instead of willy-nilly suggesting > patches that will be included in a release, that we actually take > time to think of the correct patch, to implement it and TEST against > it and only THEN have it backported. > > Please.
Suggestions have to start somewhere, I did not mean to rush on this, just expecting feedbacks (including ones like yours, which is indeed very sensible :) My point was that if we were backport r1717816 in 2.4.18 (for OPTIONS to work back), we needed more changes for RFC-compliance wrt TLS/1.x Upgrades, the one w/o the other is not suitable. So I think we all agree on the need to think/test more about this ;)
