With the voting ending, I see the following results:
+1 (binding): jorton, sf, kbrand, rjung, minfrin, jim
+1 (non-binding): Noel Butler, Steffen, mturk, Gregg Smith, Mario Bland,
+0:
-1:
As such, I call the vote as PASSING and that httpd 2.4.1 will
be released as GA.
I will move the tar
Congrats folks, way to go!
- Original Message -
> From: Jim Jagielski
> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Cc:
> Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 8:42 AM
> Subject: [RESULT] Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.1
>
> With the voting ending, I see the following result
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> As such, I call the vote as PASSING and that httpd 2.4.1 will
> be released as GA.
Congratulations, very excited to soon have 2.4 in production!
Cheers
Tom
Does this mean the Windows-specific issues have been resolved?
Or that this is a non-Windows GA?
On 2/17/2012 9:13 AM, Tom Evans wrote:
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
As such, I call the vote as PASSING and that httpd 2.4.1 will
be released as GA.
Congratulations, very
On 2/17/2012 3:15 PM, Jess Holle wrote:
Does this mean the Windows-specific issues have been resolved?
Or that this is a non-Windows GA?
No, the Windows specific issue (PR 52476) has not been solved.
So it's GA for all but Windows.
On 2/17/2012 9:13 AM, Tom Evans wrote:
On Fri, Feb 17, 20
On 2/17/2012 10:38 PM, Gregg Smith wrote:
> On 2/17/2012 3:15 PM, Jess Holle wrote:
>> Does this mean the Windows-specific issues have been resolved?
>>
>> Or that this is a non-Windows GA?
>
> No, the Windows specific issue (PR 52476) has not been solved.
> So it's GA for all but Windows.
It's q
On 2/18/2012 12:43 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> It's quite certainly GA for windows.
>
> Unless you wish to run mod_ssl on a port, and never successfully ran
> without the DisableWin32AcceptEx directive.
>
> For that small subset of users, there is more diagnostics required,
> and they won't en
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 13:56, Daniel Ruggeri wrote:
> I haven't done much building on Windows. Does anyone have a good
> link/suggestions to
> begin producing httpd builds with openssl/openldap included?
I'll send you a quick how to.
Cheers
Mario
If this is generic to builds, I would appreciate the HOWTO (link) as well
as I am investigating howto build httpd with ldap support on AIX.
One path is with openldap, other is with with itdsclient (IBM Tivoli
Directory Server) support.
Other question, while asking - what is lua support? How disapp
Hi,
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 17:22, Michael Felt wrote:
> If this is generic to builds, I would appreciate the HOWTO (link) as well as
this is very specific to Windows build. But if you want to see it. See
the second post in this topic[1]
> I am investigating howto build httpd with ldap support o
On 18 Feb 2012, at 6:22 PM, Michael Felt wrote:
> If this is generic to builds, I would appreciate the HOWTO (link) as well as
> I am investigating howto build httpd with ldap support on AIX.
> One path is with openldap, other is with with itdsclient (IBM Tivoli
> Directory Server) support.
You
Platform specific ... documentation.
Should I be thinking about writing something for AIX here, as I get it
finished. Or is the README file going to be sufficient?
I am working on it, just don't expect it yesterday :)
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 10:51 PM, Graham Leggett wrote:
> On 18 Feb 2012, at
Ok, issues with all mod_ssl would be a big problem.
If you needed to do DisableWin32AcceptEx, though, then something was
already not quite right.
What you mean by "mod_ssl on a port", though? You just mean running an
HTTPS listener right?
On 2/18/2012 12:43 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 2/20/2012 8:04 AM, Jess Holle wrote:
> Ok, issues with all mod_ssl would be a big problem.
>
> If you needed to do DisableWin32AcceptEx, though, then something was already
> not quite right.
>
> What you mean by "mod_ssl on a port", though? You just mean running an HTTPS
> listener right?
Does the event MPM work on Windows? Or is Apache on Windows still
limited to the winnt MPM? If so, doesn't this leave Apache on Windows
/far /behind other platforms when it comes to threads required for a
given load?
I guess it doesn't matter *that* much until the event MPM and mod_ssl
work
On 2/22/2012 9:21 AM, Jess Holle wrote:
> Does the event MPM work on Windows? Or is Apache on Windows still limited to
> the winnt
> MPM? If so, doesn't this leave Apache on Windows /far /behind other
> platforms when it
> comes to threads required for a given load?
No / Yes / Compared to even
> However, it should be straightforward to apply event mpm logic to the
> Windows MPM, more using completion contexts rather than poll. Any true
> completion-oriented async winnt mpm should be expected to outperform
> a poll based model, though YMMV.
IIRC there is a bugzilla patch for a complex l
17 matches
Mail list logo
