Chris et al, > I am wondering what people think of dropping support for Apache from > versions 2.0.0 through 2.0.43 as of LedgerSMB 1.3. These versions > have a bug in them which we currently work around involving escaping > urls. The bug was corrected in 2.1, 2.2, and 2.0.44. >
In principle I think that is a sound move, from both the 'enforcing end user security' angle as well as from your own point of view: maintaining more code means more potential for bugs. > But if these updates are not readily available to users, I think we > should still support the older version. Any feedback? > I think you may need to resort to democratic principles here: organise a vote :-). The only concern could be harm to people that for some reason have to run an 'older' distro like SLES 9 because of software they have on top (a typical example is OpenExchange), but I think even that distro has passed the 2.0.44 version of Apache2. Back to the vote: you've got mine, not in the least because I haven't installed it yet (wide grin). That may change as early as next week, depends on how quickly I can set up an OpenSuSE 10.2 box. /// P /// ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Ledger-smb-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ledger-smb-users
