On Jun 11, 2015 8:22 AM, "Eric Covener" wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 9:08 AM William A Rowe Jr
wrote:
>>
>> But withholding a security fix for legacy server users? Sounds like a
way to earn distrust of the user community, not reassure them that 2.4.14
is the best version available.
>
> +1
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 9:08 AM William A Rowe Jr
wrote:
> But withholding a security fix for legacy server users? Sounds like a way
> to earn distrust of the user community, not reassure them that 2.4.14 is
> the best version available.
>
+1
nouncement.
>
>
>
> *From:* William A Rowe Jr
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 11, 2015 4:54 AM
> *Newsgroups:* gmane.comp.apache.devel
> *To:* httpd
> *Subject:* Re: Review of 2.2.x security patch sought.
>
> Just a quick /nag that I'm happy to roll 2.2.30 in conjunctio
Not so happy to roll 2.2.30 in conjunction with 2.4.14.
It does not stimulate pp to upgrade to 2.4., it suggest that the httpd-project
gives 2.2 (legacy) the same priority as 2.4.
Better first 2.4 and after some time 2.2. I do not agree with the argument to
simplify the announcement.
From
