info at apachelounge
Jan 25, 2012, 1:15 PM
Post #11 of 13
Be awake, the issue is discussed on this list many times, when I recall I started it in June. On request of the list a bug is opened and there, dev's are discussing solutions on the ticket.
Re: svn commit: r1234336 - in /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x: include/ap_release.h server/util_expr_parse.c server/util_expr_parse.h
[In reply to]
I noted before here that when a issue reported on the list and a request by eg you is made to report it as a bug the big chance is that it is of the table.
Op 25 jan. 2012 om 20:28 heeft Jim Jagielski <jim [at] jaguNET> het volgende geschreven:
> Bill, you should know by now that development is done on dev@...
> private@ is "on-list" as well, by your definition.
> If anyone else would have done it, you would have, justifiable,
> jumped all on them.
> The issue is that 2.4.x is being held up by an issue, which
> is being "discussed" not on dev@, and since it's not a security
> issue, that's not the way we work.
> Yes, I am eager to get 2.4.x out; but just as I'm unwilling
> to tolerate potential stone-walling for simple stone-walling
> sake, nor should we tolerate development which *addresses*
> the issue which is holding things up, NOT being developed
> on list.
> On Jan 25, 2012, at 3:08 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
>> On 1/25/2012 1:07 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>> On Jan 23, 2012, at 3:02 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
>>>> Again, this is being discussed on
>>>> its bug ticket.
>>> Whatever happened to "if it didn't happen on-list, it didn't
>>> happen"? Are you pedantic on issues only if they don't happen
>>> to apply to you?
>> All bug ticket email activity is emailed to bugs [at] httpd
>> Once upon a time, it was all on one list. We separated this from
>> dev@ into bugs@ about a decade ago out of convenience for people
>> to help sort dialog vs. tickets. But bugs@ comments are just as
>> valid as dev@ comments; they are both on-list. Right?
>> And there's no decision on that ticket AFAIK; only input data.