svn commit: r1541829 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS

[kb...@apache.org]

Author: kbrand
Date: Thu Nov 14 05:46:22 2013
New Revision: 1541829

URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1541829
Log:
reply to comment

Modified:
    httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS

Modified: httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS?rev=1541829&r1=1541828&r2=1541829&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS (original)
+++ httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS Thu Nov 14 05:46:22 2013
@@ -163,6 +163,14 @@ PATCHES PROPOSED TO BACKPORT FROM TRUNK:
     [wrowe comments] is it possible to split the patch into 'accepted for 2.2'
     which is straightforward to review (and commit seperately) from those
     features 'new to 2.4'?  I think that would attract the necessary eyeballs.
+    kbrand: not sure what exactly "accepted for 2.2" would mean here, basically
+            all these changes are enhancements, not bug fixes (and only the
+            latter I would consider for backporting to a "legacy branch").
+            Identifying those bullets at the beginning of the 2.4.x patch
+            which you consider "accepted 2.2" might help / give further clues,
+            though it should be noted that mod_ssl in 2.4 has drifted
+            away from 2.2 quite somewhat meanwhile (think of the removal of
+            ssl_toolkit_compat.h e.g.).
 
   * mod_auth_form: Make sure the optional functions are loaded even when
     the AuthFormProvider isn't specified.