Re: svn commit: r1915740 - in /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x: ./ changes-entries/pr61574.txt modules/ssl/ssl_engine_init.c
Le 12/02/2024 à 09:37, jor...@apache.org a écrit : Author: jorton Date: Mon Feb 12 08:37:35 2024 New Revision: 1915740 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1915740=rev Log: Merge r1825120 from trunk: * modules/ssl/ssl_engine_init.c (ssl_init_PushCAList): Remove function. (ssl_init_ca_cert_path): Use SSL_add_file_cert_subjects_to_stack() instead. [Edit: This does change behaviour: the acceptable client CA list is now always be sent in sorted order rather than configured/file order. In the case of SSLCACertificatePath and SSLCADNRequestPath, the order will be stable rather than non-determistic as previously.] PR: 61574 Github: closes #406 Reviewed by: jorton, jfclere, covener Added: httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/changes-entries/pr61574.txt Modified: httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/ (props changed) httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/modules/ssl/ssl_engine_init.c Propchange: httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/ -- Merged /httpd/httpd/trunk:r1825120 r1825124 was a follow-up of this patch. Should it be backported as well? CJ
Re: libapreq subproject roll call
On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 08:10:57AM -0500, Eric Covener wrote: > I count myself as a release vote of last resort only, but i don't > think we should be committing to future fixes/releases if nearly > everyone is in this category. Thanks for raising it here, Eric. Same for me. Regards, Joe
Re: libapreq subproject roll call
On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 9:22 AM Ruediger Pluem wrote: > > > > On 2/16/24 2:10 PM, Eric Covener wrote: > >> Will apreq 2.18 still be released? > > > > I think we should, but we need someone to do the release work and 3 > > active PMC members to approve it. Prior to the recent activity, the > > subproject was essentially unchanged and unreleased for 10 years (with > > 1 failed release due to lack of votes) > > > > I would like to understand if libapreq remains viable as a project > > managed by the httpd PMC. We had this conversation last year on the > > private list and the next step is to bring it here. > > I reread the thread on the private list. Did the discussed reach out to other > PMC's happen? I don't think so, we just had Steve looped in from mod_perl. > As we discussed back then I am not sure if it will be possible to move it > into the Attic or > if there is some other way. In the worst case we just note it at > https://httpd.apache.org/apreq/ I later read the full attic process would not be possible, it was specifically discussed in some thread that it is n/a for subprojects. I think we'd just annnounce and add a README if this is the result.
Re: libapreq subproject roll call
On 2/16/24 2:10 PM, Eric Covener wrote: >> Will apreq 2.18 still be released? > > I think we should, but we need someone to do the release work and 3 > active PMC members to approve it. Prior to the recent activity, the > subproject was essentially unchanged and unreleased for 10 years (with > 1 failed release due to lack of votes) > > I would like to understand if libapreq remains viable as a project > managed by the httpd PMC. We had this conversation last year on the > private list and the next step is to bring it here. I reread the thread on the private list. Did the discussed reach out to other PMC's happen? > > It is possible the next release comes with an end-of-life date in the > future. If this codebase has a community elsewhere, they should join > us or take it over.If there is anyone out there who wants to get more > involved, please speak up. > > > I count myself as a release vote of last resort only, but i don't > think we should be committing to future fixes/releases if nearly > everyone is in this category. I am in that category as well. I don't have time in the foreseeable future to evaluate if its worth keeping at least parts of it in trunk to be used for the locations in httpd where we parse form data (there are some). I guess it could be beneficial to have this capability in a central location. OTOH looking in what we have in trunk I am a bit confused. The trunk code does not seem to have the perl glue any longer that is present in the standalone code. Did it go somewhere else back then? How would perl users continue to use it even if we would release trunk today and would close down the standalone apreq with a terminal release today? I would be trying to help with a vote on a terminal release by this PMC if no one else wants to take over the code base as is, but we should clearly retire it then. As we discussed back then I am not sure if it will be possible to move it into the Attic or if there is some other way. In the worst case we just note it at https://httpd.apache.org/apreq/ As far as I can tell there is no offer to download it from our downloads page. Hence even today people need to go to https://dlcdn.apache.org/httpd/libapreq/ directly. Regards Rüdiger
libapreq subproject roll call
> Will apreq 2.18 still be released? I think we should, but we need someone to do the release work and 3 active PMC members to approve it. Prior to the recent activity, the subproject was essentially unchanged and unreleased for 10 years (with 1 failed release due to lack of votes) I would like to understand if libapreq remains viable as a project managed by the httpd PMC. We had this conversation last year on the private list and the next step is to bring it here. It is possible the next release comes with an end-of-life date in the future. If this codebase has a community elsewhere, they should join us or take it over.If there is anyone out there who wants to get more involved, please speak up. I count myself as a release vote of last resort only, but i don't think we should be committing to future fixes/releases if nearly everyone is in this category. -- Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com
Re: release apreq 2.18 and mothball the project
Will apreq 2.18 still be released? On 16/02/2024 09:44, Joe Orton wrote: Joe, you've been warned before to moderate your language. This ends now. It is completely unacceptable to insult other members of the community like this one time, let alone repeatedly. It is unproductive, unprofessional, and in violation of the ASF code of conduct. I've taken the decision as PMC chair to remove you from dev@ and you are now banned from posting in the future. - Project Chair of HTTP Server, Joe Orton
Re: release apreq 2.18 and mothball the project
Joe, you've been warned before to moderate your language. This ends now. It is completely unacceptable to insult other members of the community like this one time, let alone repeatedly. It is unproductive, unprofessional, and in violation of the ASF code of conduct. I've taken the decision as PMC chair to remove you from dev@ and you are now banned from posting in the future. - Project Chair of HTTP Server, Joe Orton
