FWIW, this was a straight forward multi-To field email message addressed to
both lists. If there is a way I can improve the announce/release automation, I
am happy to do so. Maybe a better way is to send multiple messages?
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On September 25, 2018 7:12:25 PM EDT, William A Rowe
ne
< 250 2.0.0 Ok: queued as 9B4B1E1B
I've also added Craig here as he was unable to find the message sent to
announce@a.o - with luck, these won't vanish, but at least this time I
have the message IDs...
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On 2018-09-24 16:59, Daniel Ruggeri wrote:
Yes, I sent
pache and for mismatched SPF records.
>
>
>
>On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 9:16 AM Daniel Ruggeri
>wrote:
>
>> Hi, all;
>>I sent the announce message for 2.4.35, but haven't received it
>myself.
>> I didn't get errors sending that I am aware of. Perh
Hi, all;
I sent the announce message for 2.4.35, but haven't received it myself. I
didn't get errors sending that I am aware of. Perhaps it is in moderation? If
not, I can check in with infra to see if mail-relay.a.o ate it.
Thanks
--
Daniel Ruggeri
Ah, yes - good point. We even just talked about that topic at the board
meeting this week.
I'll nuke those and update the scripts to not generate them any more.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On 9/21/2018 11:27 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
> You may want to use this opportunity to drop md5 and sha
ished.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On 9/19/2018 5:54 AM, Joe Orton wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 11:19:10AM -0500, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 2:43 AM Joe Orton wrote:
>>> You'll likely see issues testing against OpenSSL 1.1.1 until the TLSv1.3
>>> m
rocess.
I will also plan to RM a followup release as promised now that the TLS
1.3 change has been merged... but let's give that a few weeks for other
features to make it into 2.4.x :-)
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On 9/17/2018 7:56 PM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote:
> Hi, all;
> Please find below th
around this if you're
so inclined :-)
Thanks!
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On 9/21/2018 5:59 AM, Steffen wrote:
> Maybe I overlook it:
>
> I miss in the change log:
>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&sortby=date&revision=1840546
>
> Looks it needs special w
.6.1"
iconv: "1.2.2"
brotli: "1.0.6"
nghttp2: "1.33.0"
zlib: "1.2.11"
pcre: "8.42"
libxml2: "2.9.8"
php: "5.6.38"
lua: "5.3.5"
curl: "7.61.1"
On 2018-09-17 19:56, Daniel
Wow - that's actually really cool! Thanks for sharing - would love to
see a HOWTO.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On 2018-09-19 14:59, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
Le 18/09/2018 à 02:56, Daniel Ruggeri a écrit :
Hi, all;
Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
62 *httpd-2.4.35.tar.gz
sha256: 31c2c82c9cd34749cbb60d04619d9aa3fb0814ab22246ad588d2426dde90c72c
*httpd-2.4.35.tar.gz
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On 9/17/2018 2:20 PM, Rainer Jung wrote:
> Am 17.09.2018 um 20:59 schrieb Daniel Ruggeri:
>> Hi, all;
>> I have been delayed executing the automation because the test
>> suite seems to be hanging for me. This appears to be consistently
>> during t/ssl/varlookup.t
reported start at test 35 with err "Failed test 35 in t/ssl/varlookup.t
at line 109 fail #35" and continue to 83.
If anyone has experience with this area of the test suite, pointers
definitely welcome. Otherwise, I'll start poking at it.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On 2018-09-17 10:01, Danie
by then.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
doing so.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On 2018-09-13 14:24, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
I'm unaware of anything blocking a tag today, if someone wants to
proceed. What is gained by waiting a few days to slip in another
rushed patch to break yet another release?
I see nothing in STATUS necessary to fix 2
the server with all modules
(--with-modules=reallyall, if memory serves me correctly), you would see many
more tests run. Also, do not be alarmed if the test suite doesn't take a full
night to run. That is also normal :-)
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On September 2, 2018 5:49:46 AM CDT, Danesh D
Hi, Dennis;
We took a look at that a year-ish ago, but couldn't find critical mass to
release the produced candidate. Are there things in trunk you are particularly
interested in?
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On August 31, 2018 8:29:04 AM MST, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>On 08/31/2018 02:40
h the ASF relays, announcements generated by the scripts may not
be delivered.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
e. Based on the context, I am guessing you've detected
the config struct is created and set twice, thus losing potential parameters.
If that's the case, I'm confident removing the second occurrence should be fine.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On May 31, 2018 7:54:37 AM CDT, Yann Ylavic wrote:
&g
I'm game for doing a T&R today and running the vote through Sunday (since I'm
out of town starting tomorrow) if we're ready.
Fellow devs?
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On May 29, 2018 10:42:56 AM CDT, "." wrote:
>Hey everyone,
>
> When can we expect a release of 2
Thanks, Yann;
This does help explain the rationale and I appreciate you taking the
time to walk us through the reasoning.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On 5/20/2018 3:59 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
> On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 7:19 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> I am under the impression is that we shou
we break the contract that would state "Any configuration valid
in 3.4.x will always be valid in 3.4.x." We can't do that today, but it
would be great if we could. Adding directives only in a minor bump
provides a clean point at which a known set of directives are valid.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
e
already been expressed. For its faults and virtues, at least the test framework
is in a single language. I suspect most of us can figure out what other
languages are doing, so maybe it's not a big deal... WDYT?
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On April 24, 2018 7:50:18 AM CDT, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>On
On April 24, 2018 6:53:52 AM CDT, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
>
>
>On 04/24/2018 01:19 PM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote:
>>
>>
>> On April 24, 2018 1:38:26 AM CDT, "Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group"
> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> -Ursprüngliche
On April 23, 2018 11:30:07 AM CDT, William A Rowe Jr
wrote:
>On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 11:34 AM, Daniel Ruggeri
>wrote:
>>
>> The more I think about it, the more I *really* like a semver-ish
>> approach where major represents the ABI that will not be broken,
>minor
&g
;So 2.4.36 would contain the additional features / improvements we had
>in 2.4.35 as well, but they
>have been in the "wild" for some time and the issues should have been
>identified and fixed as part
>of 2.4.36.
>Users would then have a choice what to take.
>
>Regards
>
>Rüdiger
Interesting idea. This idea seems to be converging on semver-like principles
where the double release would look like:
2.12.4 => 2.12.3 + fixes
2.13.0 => 2.12.4 + features
... which I like as a direction. However, I think distinguishing between
patch/feature releases in the patch number alone would be confusing to the user
base.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
backported unless it also involves some
changes to the Perl test framework or some pretty convincing reasons
why it's not required.
I completely support creating this as a procedure, provided we tackle
the "how do I test stuff" doco challenges, too.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
know what's in the
build so don't have to do such gymnastics).
In the same vein of thought, if it is disruptive to a config, that signals a
minor bump. Patch changes must be forward compatible.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On April 22, 2018 12:32:24 PM CDT, Eric Covener wrote:
>On Sun, Apr 2
the issues managing several
branches. (I really am digging this idea :-) I'm glad folks have
proposed it...)
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On 4/20/2018 12:08 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
> Let me counter with this... Rather than break the API every m.n
> release, what if we roll on to 2.6 with no
all should be released/disclosed at the same time).
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On 4/19/2018 7:17 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
> I don't disagree with RC's entirely, or the mechanism you suggest, but
> that isn't what I read as proposed.
>
> Our issue is that every httpd must be di
where we should ship a release sooner.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On 4/19/2018 8:06 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> One of the great things about working on open source is that
> one is NOT burdened by schedules. That releases are done
> "when ready" not when some artificial schedule or so
$TAG '' httpd-2.4 $TAG
'drugg...@primary.net'
./push.sh . $TAG dev
#Wait for vote
./push.sh . $TAG dist
#Wait for mirrors
./announce.sh $TAG 'drugg...@apache.org' 'Daniel Ruggeri'
The only hangup so far is when we merge in security fixes right before
announce -
to the URL for latest and greatest:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk/config.layout
As we love to say, "patches welcome!"
Feel free to just submit your diff here (since dev@ IS the power that be)
--
Daniel Ruggeri
the interest of module authors rather
than the folks who choose which webserver to use.
> And finally, when the vast majority of web servers nowadays live
> *behind* proxy servers, these type of metric surveys are meaningless.
> Of course, I feel that this was nginx and MS' plan all along: they
> knew how things were changing and wanted to win the "proxy server
> market"... all that should be pretty obvious w/ 20/20 hindsight.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
ersation is that we're happy (or maybe just
content) with the SSL merging fixes and we should prep to ship 2.4.34 as
a fix. Does anyone disagree?
--
Daniel Ruggeri
This is a pretty valid reason to consider 2.5. However, I'm not convinced trunk
has fixed the funky things referred to in this thread either.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On April 14, 2018 2:16:04 AM CDT, Stefan Eissing
wrote:
>
>> Am 13.04.2018 um 16:00 schrieb Joe Orton :
>>
>
erence on trunk.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On April 12, 2018 6:46:35 AM CDT, Eric Covener wrote:
>Scanners at $dayjob (and reports on security@) frequently report that
>built-in error documents suffer from non-xss HTML injection from the
>request URL.
>
>Here are a few options to
That's interesting. Does your machine bind on both IPv6 and IPv4? I would
assume just v4 and you have a localhost as ::1 in your hosts file. Is that the
case?
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On April 9, 2018 4:43:42 PM CDT, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>OK... if I change the test to use 127.0.0.1 in
it should point out why your machine
may be having problems (I don't have a way to test this on macOS). I
*DID* see some strange behavior on my Linux box in that open3 munged
both STDERR and STDOUT into a single stream... which is very unexpected.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
lines (r1827743).
--
Daniel Ruggeri
> -Original Message-
> From: Eric Covener
> Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2018 6:41 AM
> To: Apache HTTP Server Development List
> Cc: c...@httpd.apache.org
> Subject: Re: svn commit: r1827623 - /httpd/site/trunk/content/index.mdtext
>
>
Is this something I could do as part of the push to the dist release mirrors? I
have a script that handles the tarballs and doap updates so far. I'm also
working on one that will also gather details and prep announcements if we
should push these updates at that time.
--
Daniel Ru
Hi, all;
I am pleased to report that the vote to release httpd-2.4.33 has PASSED with
7 binding votes and 2 non-binding votes. I will begin the process of pushing
the release out to the mirrors today.
Cheers!
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On 2018/03/17 23:43:15, "Daniel Ruggeri" wrote:
> ...
> [ ] +1: It's not just good, it's good enough!
> ...
>
+1 for the following test:
system:
kernel:
name: Linux
release: 3.16.0-4-amd64
version: #1 SMP Debian 3.16.39-1 (2016-12-30)
crypt related, I believe my name even appears in the
changelog...
Cheers, Bernard Spil.
Well met. Welcome, Bernard.
Thanks for stopping in to say hi :-)
--
Daniel Ruggeri
e3 *httpd-2.4.33.tar.gz
sha256: cd34636caf03c9a897ddfc928fc866c965f23d909b9612880563a7ad0d1a7e5b
*httpd-2.4.33.tar.gz
--
Daniel Ruggeri
Hi, all;
I will be doing the tag and roll of 2.4.33 very soon (2ish hours). I am on
mobile so haven't reviewed STATUS since yesterday during the day - now would be
a great time for votes and backports just before bundling it all up :-)
--
Daniel Ruggeri
o so.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
ending the
announcement as noted on private@, but I think I'd sooner T&R 2.4.33 and
get ready for that one to go out.
Again, I volunteer... assuming y'all haven't come to the opinion that
I'm cursed as an RM.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
> -Original Message-
> From: William A Rowe Jr
> Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2018 4:28 PM
> To: httpd
> Subject: Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.32
>
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 4:19 PM, Daniel Ruggeri
> wrote:
> >
> > *** Changes here
> >
> -Original Message-
> From: Rainer Jung
> Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2018 12:09 PM
> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.32
>
> Am 15.03.2018 um 17:34 schrieb Yann Ylavic:
> > On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 5:20
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Ruggeri
> Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2018 12:00 PM
> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Subject: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.32
>
> Hi, all;
>
> On 2018/03/10 02:49:15, "Daniel Ruggeri" wrote:
> > Hi, all
forward to his report on votes
...
Regards, Joe
--
Daniel Ruggeri
Hi, all;
On 2018/03/10 02:49:15, "Daniel Ruggeri" wrote:
> Hi, all;
>
>Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
>
>
>
> I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days t
Thanks, Steffen;
Do you have a degree of confidence to record a vote on the release one way
or the other?
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On March 13, 2018 8:25:35 AM CDT, Steffen wrote:
>
>For testing available at
>www.apachelounge.com/viewtopic.php?p=36581#36581
>
>Attention.
&g
On 2018/03/10 02:49:15, "Daniel Ruggeri" wrote:
> Hi, all;
>Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
>
> I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release this candidate
> tarball a
0 *httpd-2.4.32.tar.gz
sha256: 11cd0c43135ffe89706d0558abc0d19cb4a1f203e11ada52f2e1c3f790959300
*httpd-2.4.32.tar.gz
--
Daniel Ruggeri
Nice work on STATUS! I plan to proceed within the next few hours unless there
are any sudden emergencies.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Ruggeri
> Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2018 8:49 AM
> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Subject: [NOTICE] Intent to T
On 2018-03-05 10:31, Joe Orton wrote:
On Sat, Mar 03, 2018 at 09:56:50AM -0600, Daniel Ruggeri wrote:
Hi, all;
Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release this
Hi, all;
Third time's a charm, eh? After the fix for ab went in this past
weekend, I'd like to propose another T&R with the included fix to be
done Friday or Saturday. If there is no opposition, I will proceed after
a few-hours-notice is shared with the list.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
ry 19, 2018, not released.
2.4.29 : Tagged on October 17, 2017. Released on October 23,
2017.
2.4.28 : Tagged on September 25, 2017. Released on October 5,
2017.
Indeed - corrected in r1825905. Thanks
--
Daniel Ruggeri
> -Original Message-
> From: Yann Ylavic [mailto:ylavic@gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2018 5:09 PM
> To: httpd-dev
> Subject: Re: Fix for ab defect (was: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.31)
>
> On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 11:48 PM, Daniel Ruggeri
> wrote:
&
give the error message to STDERR. Perhaps we should add to the test suite that
`ab -q` completed against the http and https vshosts with no lines printed to
STDERR and has a 0 exit code?
--
Daniel Ruggeri
> -Original Message-
> From: Yann Ylavic [mailto:ylavic@gmail.com
As RM, I am not comfortable releasing this with the bug discovered in ab. As
such, I'm calling this one dead-on-the-vine and version 2.4.31 will not be
released.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
From: Daniel Ruggeri [mailto:drugg...@primary.net]
Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2018 9:57 AM
To
t's have a talk.
[ ] -1: There's trouble in paradise. Here's what's wrong.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
Hi, all;
STATUS is looking good so as the subject says, I will be doing a T&R of
2.4.31 very soon. Likely in the next hour or two rather than waiting until
noon.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
d if there is no opposition to this
proposal.
Cheers!
--
Daniel Ruggeri
t's good enough!
>
> [ ] +0: Let's have a talk.
>
> [ ] -1: There's trouble in paradise. Here's what's wrong.
>
> --
>
> Daniel Ruggeri
>
>
>
>
erent tact.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
> -Original Message-
> From: drugg...@apache.org [mailto:drugg...@apache.org]
> Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2018 5:39 AM
> To: c...@httpd.apache.org
> Subject: svn commit: r1825219 - /httpd/site/trunk/tools/release.sh
>
> Author: drugger
/svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/site/trunk/tools
>
>
Sorry about that - for some reason I hadn't yet pushed them upstream. Just
pushed in r1824887 (tag.sh and push.sh).
--
Daniel Ruggeri
> -Original Message-
> From: Ruediger Pluem [mailto:rpl...@apache.org]
> Sent: Monday, February 19, 2018 9:34 AM
> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Subject: Re: svn commit: r1824751 [1/2] - in /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x: ./
> docs/manual/ docs/manual/mod/ include/
>
>
>
> On 02/19/2018 03:18
On 2018/02/15 13:49:01, Eric Covener wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 8:45 AM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote:
> > As mentioned before, I actually want to RM, but am still waiting for *any*
> > confirmation that the dead-on-the-vine 2.6 release I bundled is at least
> > str
note, the slotmem fix seems like a showstopper, right? I'd want to see
that in before a T&R.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On February 14, 2018 7:22:02 AM CST, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>I propose a T&R of 2.4.30 on Feb 19th. I offer to RM
>unless someone else would like to do so.
#x27;ve been poking at this
particular patch for about a year now and have a short attention span.
Hopefully enough feedback and work can be done soon to get *someone*
comfortable enough for another +1.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On December 13, 2017 6:19:43 AM CST, William A Rowe Jr
wrote:
>On Wed,
tying it all together
with an automated build plan.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On 11/7/2017 8:36 PM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote:
> Hi, all;
>
> Please find the proposed 2.5.0-alpha release tarballs and signatures
> at the following location. This release candidate was tagged from trunk
>
result:
log:
system:
kernel:
name:
release:
version:
machine:
libraries:
libxyz:
Feedback on anything else I should be capturing is welcome. This is the only
surviving artifact of the build and test since it's all done in ephemeral
docker containers.
On 2017-11-07
Count me in. I'm traveling a bit this time of year, but am happy to help.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On 11/24/2017 7:53 AM, Rich Bowen wrote:
> I'm sure many of you know Dawn Foster. She keynoted Apachecon for us
> in Denver.
>
> She's looking for several volunteers from
On 11/22/2017 11:55 AM, Jose Kahan wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 04:31:57PM -0600, Daniel Ruggeri wrote:
>> Also, t/php/getlastmod.t fails because of a warning[2] unless php.ini
>> has been set to explicitly declare a timezone (unsure of which version
>> PHP made this
hp.ini on the fly but we ought to handle this better in the code.
Side note... t/filter/case.t fails unless perl documentation is
installed. We should note this or pick a better file :-)
[1] http://php.net/manual/en/features.safe-mode.php
[2] http://php.net/manual/en/function.date.php#refsect1
1] http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/site/trunk/tools/release.sh
[2] http://people.apache.org/~druggeri/scripts/
[3] http://httpd.apache.org/dev/release.html
P.S.
I'll be in Dublin next week if anyone would like to catch up!
--
Daniel Ruggeri
rsation alpha1, alpha2, etc just meant
x.y.z+1-alpha since it was much easier to type that than all the dots on
my tiny little on-screen mobile keyboard
-- Daniel Ruggeri
l cut. If we decide later before Alpha2 that we should have
branched, we could easily svn copy the tag directory to a branch directory
before proceeding or branch from the post-tag commit where MMN for "next" is
bumped.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
Original Message
From: Ra
w evening (roughly 24 hours from the time I
sent this message) as a first whack at the process. This first run will
be the first full execution of the script to do the tagging and prepping
for next version. After that I'll move on to other parts of the release
process (seems like release.sh is rather complete) and, of course,
documentation updates as needed.
P.S.
Resending to dev list
--
Daniel Ruggeri
es users report things or we come across it in our own testing?
--
Daniel Ruggeri
P.S.
Resending to dev list
On 11/4/2017 5:46 AM, Luca Toscano wrote:
> I have a question for you about how do we plan to collect/list the
> 'known issues' in trunk, in order to address them properly
unity.
When 2.5 is API/ABI solidified, trunk gets branched (svn copy) to 2.6 to
live on as a stable branch. Then, trunk gets a bump up to 2.7.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
Original Message
From: Jacob Perkins
Sent: November 2, 2017 11:39:59 AM CDT
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re:
icked off the process and committed
their free time to doing it. The other thought is to help provide some
degree of regularity our community (users and devs alike) can come to
expect as well as do whatever we can to easily get experimental trunk
bits in peoples' hands for testing.
Thoughts?
--
Daniel Ruggeri
the door we'll be in a
good spot with some scripts and as minimal-as-possible manual procedures.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
+1
--
Daniel Ruggeri
Original Message
From: William A Rowe Jr
Sent: October 23, 2017 1:36:31 PM CDT
To: httpd
Subject: Simplify download distribution directory by dropping sha1 hashes?
HTTPD team,
Since our downloads are to be authenticated by their .asc PGP
signatures
the field (and have answered with a 301 to the CHANGES file).
--
Daniel Ruggeri
Original Message
From: Eric Covener
Sent: September 29, 2017 7:16:51 AM CDT
To: Apache HTTP Server Development List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.28 as GA
On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 6:57 AM
would need to be loaded to take
advantage of the macros we define. Surely some autoconf magics could be used
that say 'if mod_macro and mod_ssl are compiled, render this set of macros in
the ssl section.'
--
Daniel Ruggeri
Original Message
From: Luca Toscano
Sent: A
eers
--
Daniel Ruggeri
+1!
--
Daniel Ruggeri
Original Message
From: Jim Jagielski
Sent: May 31, 2017 7:07:21 AM CDT
To: httpd-dev
Subject: HTTP/2 and no-longer "experimental"
There was discussion some time ago about dropping the "experimental"
tag from our HTTP/2 implement
ne numbers in error messages.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
Original Message
From: Jacob Champion
Sent: May 2, 2017 5:48:34 PM CDT
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: SSL and Usability and Safety
On 05/02/2017 02:10 PM, Eric Covener wrote:
> I think to be useful, reasonable SSL def
Which reminds me... How about that cool proxy protocol patch? Anyone want to
give it a whirl? ;-)
--
Daniel Ruggeri
Original Message
From: Jim Jagielski
Sent: April 27, 2017 9:55:39 AM CDT
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: backport proposals
Yeah... sometimes it is
ProxyProtocolDisableNetworks/RemoteIPProxyProtocolExceptions/g
operation. Thanks!
I've updated the backport proposal to include your note as well as the
2.4 convenience patch.
@wrowe - I think the updated proposal addresses the concerns around the
optional processing. Would love if you can spare a few cycles before the
upcoming 2.4.26 to review and offer your +1 or at least nyx the -.5 note
in case that's deterring others.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On 4/1/2017 11:18 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> On Sat, Apr 1, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote:
>> I went with the directive name
>> RemoteIPProxyProtocolDisableHosts to align more with the fact that a
>> single host or range c
of updating the backport proposal. To be safe, I'm
removing @jim's vote given how many times the code has changed since he
reviewed and will put it back in the "active" section of STATUS.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On 4/1/2017 8:17 AM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote:
> Agreed - as many times as
ng. I
hope to have a patch later this morning to share. As awful as the name
is, I'm thinking RemoteIPProxyProtocolDisableNetworks ARG1 ARG2 ARG3.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
On 3/29/2017 4:43 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
> This is the gist of my remaining objections.
>
> It would be nice
On 3/13/2017 7:31 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 1:33 PM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote:
>> On 2/20/2017 10:58 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
>>> On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 4:44 PM, Daniel Ruggeri
>>> wrote:
>>>> Hi, Bill;
>>>>
On 2/20/2017 10:58 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 4:44 PM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote:
>> Hi, Bill;
>>I've replied about the pre_connnection situation - hoping someone can
>> give the proposed patch a test as I don't have a handy H2 testbed.
Thanks, all, for the patience as I finally got back to this.
On 2/24/2017 11:05 AM, Sander Hoentjen wrote:
>
> On 02/20/2017 07:48 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
>> On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 4:25 PM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote:
>>> On 2017-02-15 09:07 (-0600), William A Rowe Jr wrote
101 - 200 of 426 matches
Mail list logo
