2.4 still needs one reviewer to make the decision so we can have a 2.4, at last.
Thanks to Mike for the review on the 2.2 showstopper, jumping ahead on tarballs for 2.2.30 in the morning. On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 10:38 AM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote: > Hope everyone enjoyed a nice weekend, and a good holiday for those here in > the States! > > On 2.4, one significant issue remains unsettled... > > *) mod_alias: Limit Redirect expressions to directory (Location) context > and redirect statuses (implicit or explicit). > trunk patch: http://svn.apache.org/r1686853 > http://svn.apache.org/r1686856 > 2.4.x patch: trunk works (modulo CHANGES) > +1: ylavic, jim > > *) Revert insufficiently thought-out mod_alias new expression feature > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1663259 > +1: wrowe, jim > [Mutually exclusive to multiple RedirectMatch patches proposed above, > but entirely possible to vote for both or vote against either. > [docs/manual .xml's require 'build all' regeneration] > > Graham, as an original author back in January, you are in the best > position to review this fix for correctness. Alternately, if someone is > already reviewing that patch and can complete, we can avoid backing out > this enhancement for a next attempt to T&R. Backing it out is actually as > simple as a veto of the backport, but framed the choice as a vote to be > diplomatic. I for one would support the backport once again after we've > successfully released a 2.4.next. > > On 2.2, one significant issue remains unsettled... > > *) http: follow up to r1686271 (trunk) => r1686271 (2.4.x) > Handle reentrance of state BODY_CHUNK_CR to avoid AH02901 when we eat > BWS from multiple reads, and limit number of chunk-BWS to 10. > trunk patch: http://svn.apache.org/r1688536 > http://svn.apache.org/r1688538 > 2.2.x patch: trunk works > +1: ylavic, wrowe > > This one is a bit simpler to review, and mirrors what is already approved > on 2.4 branch. > > I'm hoping to tag and roll 2.2 later this afternoon, and I recall Jim > suggesting he's itching to T&R 2.4 early this week, so just more one pair > of eyeballs could get us to that point. If you can, my thanks to you in > advance. > > Bill > > >
