According to J. op den Brouw: > Time to try to include the SSL patch permanently in, say, 3.1.7? > > "Joe R. Jah" wrote: > > FYI, > > > > ssl.9 33
Most definitely not! I don't have statistics on how many downloads htdig-3.1.6.tar.gz has gotten, but it's very likely one or two orders of magnitude higher. We're not going to force all those users into potentially having to fight to build htdig on their systems all for a patch that a small minority of users would actually want. 3.1.7 will be for bug fixes, as well as small, well tested, and *portable* changes only. That was the reason for excluding the ssl patch from 3.1.6, and that reason hasn't gone away - if anything it's become more imperative. If you want SSL, deal with the patch or deal with a 3.2 beta. -- Gilles R. Detillieux E-mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Spinal Cord Research Centre WWW: http://www.scrc.umanitoba.ca/~grdetil Dept. Physiology, U. of Manitoba Phone: (204)789-3766 Winnipeg, MB R3E 3J7 (Canada) Fax: (204)789-3930 _______________________________________________ htdig-dev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/htdig-dev
