On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 8:11 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote: > > On Thu, May 24, 2018, 06:34 Eric Covener <cove...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Despite the directory structure, this was not part of a "module" in >> the httpd/LoadModule sense. I think it's reasonable to pull it "up" >> which is simpler then trying to push more stuff down into >> modules/http/. > > [Caviet] > Note that relocation is a major mmn bump, due to two level namespaces... > Which isn't usual apparent on flat namespace architectures such as Linux.
How about: 1. we move+rename the functions to "server/protocol.c" and have and the "modules/http/http_etag.c" ones simply call the formers (MINOR bump). 2. we then "svn remove" modules/http/http_etag.c and rename back ap_make_etag_core() and ap_set_etag_core() to their original names (MAJOR bump, both for namespace and removal of transient _core() functions). ? That way 1. would be backportable to 2.4.x, and after 2/ trunk in the state we want it to be. Does it sound good?
