On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 9:51 AM, Glen Mazza <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'll look at the source more thoroughly; we seem to be 50/50 between the > two spellings. The *only* reason why I might want to apply it to 5.0.2 is > because this change affects several files and it makes it easier to > backport *other* patches and security fixes when the underlying files are > identical. > Very good point. - Dave > On 03/24/2013 09:22 AM, Dave wrote: > >> I could go either way on this one, so if you want to take action please >> decide and go ahead. >> >> However, I don't think we should address this in 5.0.x -- I think we >> should >> only address security issues and critical bugs there and a spelling error >> does not feel like a critical bug. >> >> Thanks, >> - Dave >> >> >> >> On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 7:25 AM, Glen Mazza <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi, I'd like to implement https://issues.apache.org/**** >>> jira/browse/ROL-1229 <https://issues.apache.org/**jira/browse/ROL-1229>< >>> https://**issues.apache.org/jira/browse/**ROL-1229<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ROL-1229> >>> >, >>> >>> on at least 5.1 (possibly 5.0.2 as well). Any critical backwards >>> compatibility problems if I do so? Another alternative is to close this >>> issue as a "Won't Fix". (As "referer" is an HTTP term: >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/****HTTP_referer#Origin_of_the_**** >>> term_referer<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**HTTP_referer#Origin_of_the_**term_referer> >>> <http://en.**wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_**referer#Origin_of_the_term_** >>> referer<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_referer#Origin_of_the_term_referer> >>> >, >>> >>> misspelled or not.) >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Glen >>> >>> >>> >
