Re: Time for 2.4.28 ?

2017-09-23 Thread Jim Jagielski 
I'll do a T on Monday then... This give as the weekend, just
in case.

> On Sep 23, 2017, at 7:39 AM, Yann Ylavic  wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 7:52 PM, Eric Covener  wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 1:25 PM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
>>> We can wait. No reason to rush if we can hold off for a bit
>>> and ensure that 2.4.28 is as ready to go as possible.
>> 
>> Since the C-L issue is not a (recent) regression, I would just as well
>> bank the aging CVE fix now with a release rather than waiting for a
>> potentially destabilizing change.
> 
> +1

Re: Time for 2.4.28 ?

2017-09-23 Thread Yann Ylavic 
On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 7:52 PM, Eric Covener  wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 1:25 PM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
>> We can wait. No reason to rush if we can hold off for a bit
>> and ensure that 2.4.28 is as ready to go as possible.
>
> Since the C-L issue is not a (recent) regression, I would just as well
> bank the aging CVE fix now with a release rather than waiting for a
> potentially destabilizing change.

+1

Re: Time for 2.4.28 ?

2017-09-22 Thread Eric Covener 
On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 1:25 PM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> We can wait. No reason to rush if we can hold off for a bit
> and ensure that 2.4.28 is as ready to go as possible.

Since the C-L issue is not a (recent) regression, I would just as well
bank the aging CVE fix now with a release rather than waiting for a
potentially destabilizing change.

Re: Time for 2.4.28 ?

2017-09-22 Thread Jim Jagielski 
We can wait. No reason to rush if we can hold off for a bit
and ensure that 2.4.28 is as ready to go as possible.

> On Sep 22, 2017, at 1:23 PM, William A Rowe Jr  wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 7:06 AM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
>> STATUS looks clean.
>> 
>> Hoping to do a T this afternoon, eastern, unless I hear
>> any objections or concerns re: timing.
> 
> svn looks good here. Only one potentially missed item IMO, it could wait
> till 2.4.29, but if we hear right back from jorton or rpluem on the readiness
> of the patch, I'd love to see us quit consuming extra memory r.e. PR61222,
> so the backport has my +1 already. If you look at comments in this ticket,
> the review has already happened and everyone seemed mostly satisfied.
> 
> Suggesting a parallel apr/-util release over on dev@apr. Thanks for RM'ing!

Re: Time for 2.4.28 ?

2017-09-22 Thread William A Rowe Jr 
On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 7:06 AM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> STATUS looks clean.
>
> Hoping to do a T this afternoon, eastern, unless I hear
> any objections or concerns re: timing.

svn looks good here. Only one potentially missed item IMO, it could wait
till 2.4.29, but if we hear right back from jorton or rpluem on the readiness
of the patch, I'd love to see us quit consuming extra memory r.e. PR61222,
so the backport has my +1 already. If you look at comments in this ticket,
the review has already happened and everyone seemed mostly satisfied.

Suggesting a parallel apr/-util release over on dev@apr. Thanks for RM'ing!

Re: Time for 2.4.28 ?

2017-09-22 Thread Jim Jagielski 
STATUS looks clean.

Hoping to do a T this afternoon, eastern, unless I hear
any objections or concerns re: timing.

Cheers!

Re: Time for 2.4.28 ?

2017-09-21 Thread Jim Jagielski 
Looks like we need 1 more vote on it for it to be folded in on time
for 2.4.28.

> On Sep 19, 2017, at 1:48 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote:
> 
> There have been no issues w/ that on trunk... will
> fold into 2.4 and do some stress testing over the next
> 2 days.
> 
>> On Sep 19, 2017, at 12:58 PM, Yann Ylavic <ylavic@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 6:41 PM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
>> <s.pri...@profihost.ag> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Do we get this one into 2.4.28?
>>> 
>>> https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60956
>> 
>> Proposed for backport now, will see...
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Yann.
>

Re: Time for 2.4.28 ?

2017-09-19 Thread Jim Jagielski 
There have been no issues w/ that on trunk... will
fold into 2.4 and do some stress testing over the next
2 days.

> On Sep 19, 2017, at 12:58 PM, Yann Ylavic  wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 6:41 PM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
>  wrote:
>> 
>> Do we get this one into 2.4.28?
>> 
>> https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60956
> 
> Proposed for backport now, will see...
> 
> Regards,
> Yann.

Re: Time for 2.4.28 ?

2017-09-19 Thread Yann Ylavic 
On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 6:41 PM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
 wrote:
>
> Do we get this one into 2.4.28?
>
> https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60956

Proposed for backport now, will see...

Regards,
Yann.

Re: Time for 2.4.28 ?

2017-09-19 Thread Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG 

> Am 19.09.2017 um 15:50 schrieb Jacob Perkins :
> 
> 
> 
>> On Sep 18, 2017, at 11:24 AM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
>> 
>> Seems like a good time to push for a 2.4.28 T by end-of-week.
>> Review STATUS! Test and Vote on backports!
>> 
>> Comments?

Do we get this one into 2.4.28?

> https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60956

Greets,
Stefan

Re: Time for 2.4.28 ?

2017-09-19 Thread Jacob Perkins 
+1

—
Jacob Perkins
Product Owner
cPanel Inc.

jacob.perk...@cpanel.net 
Office:  713-529-0800 x 4046
Cell:  713-560-8655

> On Sep 18, 2017, at 11:24 AM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> 
> Seems like a good time to push for a 2.4.28 T by end-of-week.
> Review STATUS! Test and Vote on backports!
> 
> Comments?



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Re: Time for 2.4.28 ?

2017-09-18 Thread Yann Ylavic 
On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 6:24 PM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> Seems like a good time to push for a 2.4.28 T by end-of-week.
> Review STATUS! Test and Vote on backports!
>
> Comments?

+1

Re: Time for 2.4.28 ?

2017-09-18 Thread Daniel Gruno 
On 09/18/2017 06:24 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Seems like a good time to push for a 2.4.28 T by end-of-week.
> Review STATUS! Test and Vote on backports!
> 
> Comments?
> 
+1!

Time for 2.4.28 ?

2017-09-18 Thread Jim Jagielski 
Seems like a good time to push for a 2.4.28 T by end-of-week.
Review STATUS! Test and Vote on backports!

Comments?