https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55841
--- Comment #5 from Filipus Klutiero <chea...@gmail.com> ---
I do not exactly agree with Vincent's message. This ticket is not "saying that
by having a description of all the new features in the 2.4 branch as a whole
under a title that names a specific minor release is misleading." What this
ticket says is that the precise wording used ("This version of httpd is a major
release of the 2.2 legacy branch.") is misleading. I think that is also what
Vincent meant since he proposes rewording as a solution himself.
I do agree with Vincent on the fact that the bug is quite clear though. I do
not understand how one can claim that the message is clear. To understand what
the news items are trying to say, one would need to resolve "This version of
httpd" to httpd 2.2 in the sentence quoted above. The question is therefore how
likely is it for someone unaware of this bug to do that, given that all the
item contains before that sentence is:
>Apache httpd 2.2.31 Released 2015-07-17
>The Apache HTTP Server Project is proud to announce the release of version
>2.2.31 of the Apache HTTP Server ("httpd"). This version is a security and
>bugfix release.
In fact, the sentence right before the problematic sentence contains "This
version" referring to 2.x.y. So I cannot see how a reader could figure out the
intended meaning without realizing that the sentence makes no sense otherwise.
Calling this "misleading" is to put it mildly.
The fact that no comment "supports the issue", as you describe it, does not
make a ticket invalid. A ticket is only invalid if its claim is incorrect.
I disagree about it being the "responsibility of who downloads/update the new
version of httpd to check the changelog for the new minor release (not relying
only on the email message)." Users should be able to trust email sent by the
foundation. And they should certainly be allowed to trust the homepage of
http://httpd.apache.org. Besides, it is not about the changelog. This bug can
cause 2 mistaken decisions:
1. An administrator updating from 2.x.y to 2.x.z in order to obtain features
which are already present in 2.x.y.
2. An administrator choosing not to update from 2.x.y to 2.x.z to avoid
breakage caused by changes which were not introduced between 2.x.y and 2.x.z.
As I wrote, the scenario which prompted me to report this is the second.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscr...@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-h...@httpd.apache.org
