> On Dec 8, 2015, at 11:11 AM, Yann Ylavic <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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 ;)
Oh, agreed 100%.
