[EPEL-devel] Re: Exception request: major version bump for Nginx

2016-04-28 Thread Anssi Johansson
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

[EPEL-devel] Re: Exception request: major version bump for Nginx

2016-04-28 Thread Jamie Nguyen
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

[EPEL-devel] Re: Exception request: major version bump for Nginx

2016-04-27 Thread Anssi Johansson
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

[EPEL-devel] Re: Exception request: major version bump for Nginx

2016-02-24 Thread Stephen John Smoogen
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 >

[EPEL-devel] Re: Exception request: major version bump for Nginx

2016-02-14 Thread Ken Dreyer
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

[EPEL-devel] Re: Exception request: major version bump for Nginx

2016-01-31 Thread Jamie Nguyen
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.