We have been at 2.4.29-dev for a few days now, are you ready to advance this proposal?
On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 1:07 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 1:02 PM, Joe Orton <jor...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 11:39:54AM -0500, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > >> This defect still appears to exist in 2.4.28-dev, no? > >> > >> The rewrite appears to have enjoyed both committer and external testing > and > >> the patch looks suitable for backport. It has enjoyed careful > consideration by > >> at least four committers. > >> > >> Reading https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61222#c19 Joe > was > >> eyeing some additional improvements, but it seems worthwhile to get this > >> defect fixed in today's T&R. > >> > >> Joe, is there a reason to hold on backporting, why this hasn't been > promoted > >> to 2.4 STATUS? If you are satisfied, here's my +1 for the backport to > speed > >> things up. > > > > I don't plan any additional changes, no. But I'm not very confident we > > should be throwing a major rewrite of a core filter at 2.4 users with > > only light testing, especially since there are security fixes pending. > > > > I have put this patch in Fedora "Raw Hide" builds to give some extra > > exposure, and I'd love to hear more testing results here. Given that the > > bug has sat festering for a long time (maybe since 2.2??) I don't see > > any urgency, I'd rather get a bit more testing and wait until after .28 > > to ship and avoid regressions. > > Cool, add my +1 into your STATUS proposal once 2.4.29-dev rolls around, > and let's let this live on the maintenance dev branch as long as possible > to > pick up any regressions. > > Thanks for all your effort on this! >
