You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to cvs@httpd.apache.org by ji...@apache.org on 2007/02/15 16:14:25 UTC
svn commit: r507956 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/STATUS
Author: jim
Date: Thu Feb 15 07:14:25 2007
New Revision: 507956
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=507956
Log:
Actually, I think this should be a show-stopper, since the
current behavior is broke broke broke.
Modified:
httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/STATUS
Modified: httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/STATUS
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/STATUS?view=diff&rev=507956&r1=507955&r2=507956
==============================================================================
--- httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/STATUS (original)
+++ httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/STATUS Thu Feb 15 07:14:25 2007
@@ -74,6 +74,10 @@
RELEASE SHOWSTOPPERS:
+ * mod_proxy: Various settings being ignored due to not merging *_set params
+ PR: 11540
+ http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=507516
+ +1: jim
PATCHES ACCEPTED TO BACKPORT FROM TRUNK:
[ start all new proposals below, under PATCHES PROPOSED. ]
@@ -173,7 +177,3 @@
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=486320
+1: trawick, rpluem
- * mod_proxy: Various settings being ignored due to not merging *_set params
- PR: 11540
- http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=507516
- +1: jim
Re: svn commit: r507956 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/STATUS
Posted by Nick Kew <ni...@webthing.com>.
On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 15:33:37 +0000
Nick Kew <ni...@webthing.com> wrote:
> > WE'RE PATHETIC IF WE SHIP ANOTHER RELEASE WITHOUT THESE APPROVED:
>
> That's +1 on this list from me. And yesterday from wrowe, minfrin.
>
Oh, er, scrub that. Was my other tiny-but-significant commit.
Still +1 from me.
--
Nick Kew
Application Development with Apache - the Apache Modules Book
http://www.apachetutor.org/
Re: svn commit: r507956 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/STATUS
Posted by Nick Kew <ni...@webthing.com>.
On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 10:24:57 -0500
"Jeff Trawick" <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2/15/07, jim@apache.org <ji...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Author: jim
> > Date: Thu Feb 15 07:14:25 2007
> > New Revision: 507956
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=507956
> > Log:
> > Actually, I think this should be a show-stopper, since the
> > current behavior is broke broke broke.
>
> I wouldn't call this a showstopper since it has worked that way for a
> while and does not represent a regression since the previous release.
>
> otoh, I could go for this heading ;)
>
> WE'RE PATHETIC IF WE SHIP ANOTHER RELEASE WITHOUT THESE APPROVED:
That's +1 on this list from me. And yesterday from wrowe, minfrin.
--
Nick Kew
Application Development with Apache - the Apache Modules Book
http://www.apachetutor.org/
Re: svn commit: r507956 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/STATUS
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Jeff Trawick wrote:
> On 2/15/07, jim@apache.org <ji...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Author: jim
>> Date: Thu Feb 15 07:14:25 2007
>> New Revision: 507956
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=507956
>> Log:
>> Actually, I think this should be a show-stopper, since the
>> current behavior is broke broke broke.
>
> I wouldn't call this a showstopper since it has worked that way for a
> while and does not represent a regression since the previous release.
>
> otoh, I could go for this heading ;)
>
> WE'RE PATHETIC IF WE SHIP ANOTHER RELEASE WITHOUT THESE APPROVED:
+1 :)
Re: svn commit: r507956 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/STATUS
Posted by Jeff Trawick <tr...@gmail.com>.
On 2/15/07, jim@apache.org <ji...@apache.org> wrote:
> Author: jim
> Date: Thu Feb 15 07:14:25 2007
> New Revision: 507956
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=507956
> Log:
> Actually, I think this should be a show-stopper, since the
> current behavior is broke broke broke.
I wouldn't call this a showstopper since it has worked that way for a
while and does not represent a regression since the previous release.
otoh, I could go for this heading ;)
WE'RE PATHETIC IF WE SHIP ANOTHER RELEASE WITHOUT THESE APPROVED: