28.4.2016, 10.03, Jamie Nguyen kirjoitti:
On 28/04/16 06:28, Anssi Johansson wrote:
This change to the plans was discussed briefly in yesterday's EPEL
Steering Committee meeting, and we're OK with updating straight to 1.10.x.
I believe there are a number of people who are interested in HTTP/2
On 28/04/16 06:28, Anssi Johansson wrote:
> This change to the plans was discussed briefly in yesterday's EPEL
> Steering Committee meeting, and we're OK with updating straight to 1.10.x.
>
> I believe there are a number of people who are interested in HTTP/2
> support, so please do go on with
27.4.2016, 14.23, Jamie Nguyen kirjoitti:
On 24/02/16 23:36, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On 29 January 2016 at 06:51, Jamie Nguyen wrote:
My plan:
1. Update to 1.8.x on all branches (or to as recent a version as they
can go without FTBFS)
2. Leave them in epel-testing for
On 29 January 2016 at 06:51, Jamie Nguyen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> A few days ago, three CVEs for Nginx and were fixed in 1.8.1. Upstream
> only maintain 1.8.x and above, so they didn't release any fixes for
> older versions of Nginx. I was able to backport the relevant commits to
>
On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 6:51 AM, Jamie Nguyen wrote:
> Sound reasonable?
As an EPEL nginx user, thanks for looking into this, and you have my
+1 for updating to a new secure version.
- Ken
___
epel-devel mailing list
On 29/01/16 14:56, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> Thank-you for your request. I think that this is a good candidate for a
> break in all three channels. I will try to get enough EPSco people to look
> at this and give feedback while we are at FOSDEM. Hope to have a +1 for you
> soon
Awesome.