On Jun 11, 2015 8:22 AM, Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 9:08 AM William A Rowe Jr wr...@rowe-clan.net
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
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
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 9:08 AM William A Rowe Jr wr...@rowe-clan.net
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
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:* William
