From 8487eaaacde66e7542aa8e237e3fa98f621ef58a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jeff Trawick Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 16:24:33 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] answer Jim git-svn-id: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x@1440505 13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68 --- STATUS | 9 ++++++++- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/STATUS b/STATUS index 41c7470a7b..eb4cd8a769 100644 --- a/STATUS +++ b/STATUS @@ -122,7 +122,14 @@ PATCHES PROPOSED TO BACKPORT FROM TRUNK: who enable those scripts with inserting the right shebang should be 100% aware of any risks (this should cover your last point). jim: trawick, does the above address your concerns? - + trawick: to some extent (somebody reading the script gets an idea) + Why isn't the configuration requirement documented instead + of described indirectly in a sample? + Why are these new samples added to the install without three + votes? (I didn't veto it; put your name next to the two + existing ones and I'll be satisified that enough people + considered this addition as an appropriate solution for a + real httpd usability problem.) * mod_proxy: Allow balancers to be server-specific, as they should have been. Inheritance causes too many behind-the-scene interactions -- 2.50.1