One of these tests actually reported a problem with the "whimsical" patch under consideration, Yann. But instead of confronting you about it, Joe O just removed that test from the suite prior to release.
This is the very last time I expect to say something critical about 2.17. Let's make it the last time I say something critical about the team effort into producing any rapreq elease going forward. You guys know better, and all I ask is that you keep your own standards intact for apreq (without adding any formal process to ensure it). In the end, we're all volunteers- but don't dismiss the work of your predecessors so quickly in the future. On Fri, Nov 4, 2022 at 2:01 PM <j...@sunstarsys.com> wrote: > There's literally over 1M tests in library/t/parsers.c; all of them are > trivial to adjust to taste. > Going forward, if you want to establish different types of parser > behaviors, positively document those behaviors in the test suite, just like > your predecessors did. > Let's not make what happened with 2.17 a new status quo for your efforts. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Yann Ylavic <ylavic....@gmail.com> > Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2022 9:47 AM > To: dev@httpd.apache.org > Cc: Joe Schaefer <j...@sunstarsys.com> > Subject: Re: [libapreq2] nits to pick about the patches to util.c over the > past few years > > On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 7:44 PM Joe Schaefer <j...@sunstarsys.com> wrote: > > > > The reason this took so long for the community to diagnose isn't > > because of ill-intent, but because it constituted a change of behavior > in the parser logic that wasn't surfaced in the Changes file. > > Please review r1905018 (with a CHANGES entry this time), along with > r1905019 and r1905020 eventually. > I'd suggest subscribing to c...@httpd.apache.org (if not already) and > filter/mark subjects with "/httpd/apreq" if you don't want to miss anything. > > > > > There is never going to come a time when there is any need for urgent > > action on apreq- if it was easy to zero-day it, it would have happened > > by now. Thus, take as much time as you need between releases to > > communicate with the community about the nature of the deltas you intend > to ship with any GA release. You have my email address if you need to > spitball any patchsets you are toying with; it's a lot less painful to get > my input in advance than after the fact. > > That's not how it usually works though: r1895107 is dated "Nov 17, 2021", > the [VOTE] for v2.17 started "Aug 18, 2022" and ended Aug 25, which left > you 8 months to review the changes in trunk (and chime in..). > > > Regards; > Yann. > -- Joe Schaefer, Ph.D. We only build what you need built. <j...@sunstarsys.com> 954.253.3732 <//954.253.3732>
