At 3:47 AM -0700 7/14/01, Joe R. Jah wrote:
> > ssl.4 296 omitted
>
>This is the second most popular patch in the site; I am sure there will be
>scores of requests for it. If you haven't backported the ssl code from
>3.2, I suggest to port this patch to 3.1.6.
There's absolutely no way anyone wants to backport the HTTPS/SSL code
from 3.2--this would require backporting all the new Transport class
code as well as the modifications to the URL, Retriever, Document,
URLRef, etc. classes.
As to excluding the ssl.4 patch from 3.1.6, I'd generally give it a
-1. It's not that the patch is bad or buggy. But the code prior to
the 3.2 split (which happened shortly after 3.1.0 came out) is simply
too heavily tied to HTTP.
I think it's a great patch. But I wouldn't run it on htdig.org--the
base code was changed for 3.2 and patching the duct tape is not a
good idea for a "maintenance release."
> > new.pl 74 omitted
>This is the working version of whatsnew.pl; why is it omitted?
It might be worth updating the contrib/ directory--but it's not
really a patch. At least that would be my interpretation. Gilles?
>Have you by any chance backported duplicate prevention procedure form 3.2
>code, or plan to do so? If not I urge you to port this patch to 3.1.6.
Hmm. I don't think the 3.2 duplicate detection code is very robust
yet, so I certainly wouldn't suggest it be backported. As for the
patch that deals with local_urls, I'd give the same reasoning I did
for not including it in previous 3.1.x releases--it doesn't help with
HTTP indexing. And I think it's in the HTTP indexing that there are
more problems.
Just my $0.02. I'm going to let Gilles make the call unless he asks otherwise.
-Geoff
_______________________________________________
htdig-dev mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/htdig-dev
