On Fri, Nov 09, 2018 at 02:15:07PM +1000, Noel Butler wrote:
> even those distro package maintainers get sick to F'n death of it after
> a while and skip updates.
I do not see any reason I should get distinguished by it. Frequent
version updates are even better for me.
Petr
I’m all for this as well, because people want the new hotness. That said, for
people downstream that have to support
httpd, y’all are releasing really fast. I get it, and we haven’t really had any
problems (minus a weird semaphore issue we
haven’t tracked down yet), I’m noticing an increase of
On 08/11/2018 19:11, Stefan Eissing wrote:
> 2. I think regular releases are good for the people here and motivate people
> from outside to contribute.
For people here.. what about the people not here, you know them,
99.9% of them, the system admins responsible for all
those
> Am 07.11.2018 um 16:15 schrieb Jim Jagielski :
>
> Now that we have a 2.4.37 out, one in which the number of enhancements and
> fixes and feature were limited, it makes sense to consider having a 2.4.38
> release somewhat "soonish", esp considering the number of backports that lack
> only
Hi all,
I have a customer asking about whether the SSL handshake can be made to
fail in case the SNI from the "Client Hello" message doesn't match at
all any server name of the configured virtual hosts. E.g. consider a
setup like this
DNS records:
domain-a.tld resolves to
domain-b.tld also
I like the idea. I even have a reminder in my calendar for Sunday titled "check
if release is ready to roll" :-)
I can RM again, even.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On November 7, 2018 9:15:06 AM CST, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>Now that we have a 2.4.37 out, one in which the number of enhancements
>and fixes
I have a semi-working implementation that I'll be committing to trunk in a
bit...
> On Nov 8, 2018, at 1:33 AM, Mladen Turk wrote:
>
> On 30.10.2018. 13:53, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> As some of you know, one of my passions and area of focus is
>> on the use of Apache httpd as a reverse proxy
