Re: Time for 2.4.34?
My plan is to T&R sometime Tues or Weds... to ensure that everyone has had enough time for a Head's Up and to bring up issues/concerns. > On Jul 5, 2018, at 3:39 PM, Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group > wrote: > > > >> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- >> Von: Yann Ylavic >> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 5. Juli 2018 21:34 >> An: httpd-dev >> Betreff: Re: Time for 2.4.34? >> >> On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 9:11 PM, Yann Ylavic >> wrote: >>> On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 5:43 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >>>> Seems to me that we are just about due for a 2.4.34 release... >>>> Anyone opposed? I volunteer to RM. >>> >>> +1, thanks Jim. >> >> Possibly someone for the last vote on r1588806? >> This simple change can avoid hard to diagnose bugs, with very little >> risk IMO. > > Done. r1835177. > > Regards > > Rüdiger
AW: Time for 2.4.34?
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- > Von: Yann Ylavic > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 5. Juli 2018 21:34 > An: httpd-dev > Betreff: Re: Time for 2.4.34? > > On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 9:11 PM, Yann Ylavic > wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 5:43 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > >> Seems to me that we are just about due for a 2.4.34 release... > >> Anyone opposed? I volunteer to RM. > > > > +1, thanks Jim. > > Possibly someone for the last vote on r1588806? > This simple change can avoid hard to diagnose bugs, with very little > risk IMO. Done. r1835177. Regards Rüdiger
Re: Time for 2.4.34?
On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 9:11 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 5:43 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> Seems to me that we are just about due for a 2.4.34 release... >> Anyone opposed? I volunteer to RM. > > +1, thanks Jim. Possibly someone for the last vote on r1588806? This simple change can avoid hard to diagnose bugs, with very little risk IMO.
Re: Time for 2.4.34?
On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 5:43 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > Seems to me that we are just about due for a 2.4.34 release... > Anyone opposed? I volunteer to RM. +1, thanks Jim.
Re: Time for 2.4.34?
I can get their efforts committed late this evening, if nobody beats me to it. Expect to need a bit of crlf tweaking. On Thu, Jul 5, 2018, 12:36 Marion et Christophe JAILLET < christophe.jail...@wanadoo.fr> wrote: > +1, but latest zh-cn and zh-tw translation of error pages should be > included IMHO. > > I've pushed for including what was already in trunk, but Codeingboy and > popcorner have made improvements since the backport. (see docs@ ML) > > Not sure to have time tonight to push it on trunk and propose for backport. > And, after tonight, I won't be able before monday evening. > > CJ > > > Le 05/07/2018 à 17:43, Jim Jagielski a écrit : > > Seems to me that we are just about due for a 2.4.34 release... > > Anyone opposed? I volunteer to RM. > > > >
Re: Time for 2.4.34?
+1, but latest zh-cn and zh-tw translation of error pages should be included IMHO. I've pushed for including what was already in trunk, but Codeingboy and popcorner have made improvements since the backport. (see docs@ ML) Not sure to have time tonight to push it on trunk and propose for backport. And, after tonight, I won't be able before monday evening. CJ Le 05/07/2018 à 17:43, Jim Jagielski a écrit : Seems to me that we are just about due for a 2.4.34 release... Anyone opposed? I volunteer to RM.
Re: Time for 2.4.34?
On 2018-07-05 10:43, Jim Jagielski wrote: Seems to me that we are just about due for a 2.4.34 release... Anyone opposed? I volunteer to RM. +1 Do let me know if any of the scripts behave poorly for you. One thing worth noting, if your local server isn't configured to send emails through the ASF relays, announcements generated by the scripts may not be delivered. -- Daniel Ruggeri
Re: Time for 2.4.34?
Le jeudi 05 juillet 2018 à 11:43 -0400, Jim Jagielski a écrit : > Seems to me that we are just about due for a 2.4.34 release... > Anyone opposed? I volunteer to RM. +1, don't wait for my LFS patch. I'll submit for >2.4.34 (.35 or more). Alain
Re: Time for 2.4.34?
+1 Thanks Jim! > Am 05.07.2018 um 17:43 schrieb Jim Jagielski : > > Seems to me that we are just about due for a 2.4.34 release... > Anyone opposed? I volunteer to RM.
Re: Time for 2.4.34?
On 05 Jul 2018, at 5:43 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > Seems to me that we are just about due for a 2.4.34 release... > Anyone opposed? I volunteer to RM. +1, and thank you. Regards, Graham —
Time for 2.4.34?
Seems to me that we are just about due for a 2.4.34 release... Anyone opposed? I volunteer to RM.
Re: time for 2.4.34?
Yes, for sure :) > On May 1, 2018, at 9:32 PM, Alain Toussaint wrote: > > I promised a patch for BLFS layout and haven't delivered yet. Will the > release happen after > Thursday? (I'll take Thursday to deliver the layout patch). > > Alain
Re: time for 2.4.34?
On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 11:15 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > Considering that we have some regressions in .33 which > will soon be fixed (these are the 2 noted ShowStoppers) The fix for PR 62308 is being tested and we should be good soon, I think. I don't think PR 62277 is a regression/showstopper, the OP reports an issue on slotmems after an upgrade from 2.2 to 2.4 (slotmems didn't exist in 2.2, and the mod_proxy_lb quite changed in between). Also, it looks more like an IPC-SysV "limitation" (on some Solaris version?) than a bug in our code, maybe should we consider a move to POSIX sems by default in trunk/2.next? By the way, I modified the tool (attached in bz) to show what I suspect are spurious collisions in ftok()+semget() with the OP's balancers' names, but he switched to POSIX sems so I'm not sure he will test any further. Possibly Rainer could try to run it on his Solaris(es) to confirm or not (no specific version mentioned in bz...). > as well as a limited number of "other" changes to the > codebase, maybe now is a Good Time to consider a 2.4.34...? +1, once these are addressed. > > I offer to RM using Daniel's updated release scripts so > we can get a different set of eyes using the scripts. Thanks! Regards, Yann.
Re: time for 2.4.34?
On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 05:15:54PM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote: > Considering that we have some regressions in .33 which > will soon be fixed (these are the 2 noted ShowStoppers) > as well as a limited number of "other" changes to the > codebase, maybe now is a Good Time to consider a 2.4.34...? > > I offer to RM using Daniel's updated release scripts so > we can get a different set of eyes using the scripts. Thanks Jim that sounds good. FYI on the mod_ssl vhost fix, Fedora users are giving +ve feedback from testing that patch - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1564537 Regards, Joe
Re: time for 2.4.34?
+1. Some h2 issues accumulated, just got confirmation on the keepalive fix and will propose for backport today. Nothing else in the pipe from me. > Am 01.05.2018 um 23:15 schrieb Jim Jagielski : > > Considering that we have some regressions in .33 which > will soon be fixed (these are the 2 noted ShowStoppers) > as well as a limited number of "other" changes to the > codebase, maybe now is a Good Time to consider a 2.4.34...? > > I offer to RM using Daniel's updated release scripts so > we can get a different set of eyes using the scripts.
Re: time for 2.4.34?
Le mardi 01 mai 2018 à 17:15 -0400, Jim Jagielski a écrit : > Considering that we have some regressions in .33 which > will soon be fixed (these are the 2 noted ShowStoppers) > as well as a limited number of "other" changes to the > codebase, maybe now is a Good Time to consider a 2.4.34...? > > I offer to RM using Daniel's updated release scripts so > we can get a different set of eyes using the scripts. I promised a patch for BLFS layout and haven't delivered yet. Will the release happen after Thursday? (I'll take Thursday to deliver the layout patch). Alain
Re: time for 2.4.34?
On 01 May 2018, at 11:15 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > Considering that we have some regressions in .33 which > will soon be fixed (these are the 2 noted ShowStoppers) > as well as a limited number of "other" changes to the > codebase, maybe now is a Good Time to consider a 2.4.34...? > > I offer to RM using Daniel's updated release scripts so > we can get a different set of eyes using the scripts. +1, and thank you for this. Regards, Graham — smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
time for 2.4.34?
Considering that we have some regressions in .33 which will soon be fixed (these are the 2 noted ShowStoppers) as well as a limited number of "other" changes to the codebase, maybe now is a Good Time to consider a 2.4.34...? I offer to RM using Daniel's updated release scripts so we can get a different set of eyes using the scripts.
