> On Dec 11, 2017, at 9:09 AM, Steffen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > A cause for minimal participation can be that dev is going with git. > > Mentioned Issues and Requests are at https://github.com/icing/mod_md/issues > <https://github.com/icing/mod_md/issues> and not at a httpd list. > > The renaming discussion was one of the mod_md sporadic posts on the dev list > at a late moment. Do not feel kidding, I think the more you use this list the > more responses you get (only 22 are watching at git). > > The windows community has tested/participated from the beginning. I do not > know how much is tested on other platforms by users. > > From now on I prefer to discuss issues/requests here at this list. And I like > to see test reports from non-windows platforms. > > @Jim In status I see you voted +1, is that based on code review and/or > testing ?
Yes, both :) > > > > > On Monday 11/12/2017 at 11:11, Stefan Eissing wrote: >> >> >>> Am 11.12.2017 um 11:08 schrieb Stefan Eissing <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>>: >>> >>> >>>> Am 08.12.2017 um 19:35 schrieb William A Rowe Jr <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>: >>>> >>>> On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 8:03 AM, Luca Toscano <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>> Maybe ManagedDomain and <ManagedDomainDefine>, as iiuc we are going to use >>>>> for SSLPolicy? >>>> >>>> Just an observation, >>>> http://httpd.apache.org/docs/trunk/mod/quickreference.html >>>> <http://httpd.apache.org/docs/trunk/mod/quickreference.html> >>>> illustrated that we have no verbs in <Section > directive block >>>> titles, thus far. >>>> >>>> <ManagedDomain > or <MDPolicy > followed by ManagedDomainSet >>>> or MDPolicyElect or something similar seems more in keeping with the >>>> existing naming convention for directives. Bothers me when we overload >>>> with yet one additional naming scheme, that would probably bother our >>>> users more than confusing directive names. >>> >>> There are important questions on how we progress the design of the server. >>> I >>> have asked for participation and feedback on the design of ACME support in >>> httpd >>> since April. Shoulder clapping, "go ahead!", "fine!". >>> >>> Answers to design questions: not really >>> Requests for opinion about a "restart" feature: 0 >>> Code request for a Windows Service restart call: 0 >>> Request of a serf based implementation of the http client: 0 >>> Feedback from testing by the team: 0 >> >> Correction: Steffen and Luca have tested and given feedback. >> >>> Opinions about renaming parts/the whole thing just days before >>> a possible release to users who want this: +7 >>> >>> You got to be kiddding me! >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Stefan >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > >
