[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T&R 2.4.36

On Oct 10, 2018, at 3:37 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wrowe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018, 14:28 Jim Jagielski <jim@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Oct 10, 2018, at 3:01 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wrowe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 1:45 PM Jim Jagielski <jim@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I thought the whole intent for a quick 2.4.36 was for TLSv1.3 support.

If that's not ready for prime time, then why a release??

AIUI, it isn't that httpd isn't ready for release, or even httpd-test framework.
Until all the upstream CPAN modules behave reasonably with openssl 1.1.1
we will continue to see odd test results.

The question is How Comfortable Are We That TLSv1.3 Support Is Production Ready?

This release seems very, very rushed to me. It seems strange that for someone who balks against releasing s/w that hasn't been sufficiently tested, or could cause regressions, and that the sole reason for this particular release is TLSv1.3 support which seems insufficiently tested, you are uncharacteristic cool with all this.

You elided the other half of my answer, you might want to read the entire comment.

If we can exercise the same discipline with 2.4.37 that we showed with 2.4.35, then instead of producing a string of releases with a string of regressions, we still come out ahead for all users.

You wrote:
   It was my hope we would push this out as 2.5.1-alpha, as now synced
   with 2.4.x branch, and let the eager early adopters help us uncover any
   unforeseen issues. Think we have a handle on, and have addressed
   the anticipated issues.

So "eager early adopters" are OK with modules *you* wish to push out, even if they aren't quite ready, but NOT OK with modules and features others want, even if they also agree that they 'have a handle on, and have addressed the anticipated issues'

In other words: would anyone else have suggested adding a major feature such as this, with somewhat questionable testing as well as it being the sole reason for said release, you would have complained and dismissed such explanations as 'eager early adopters' as facetious. I am glad that this is no longer the case and you have Seen The Light! As long as we can show an attempt at testing, and convince ourselves we have a "handle on" anything that might pop up, and addressed any anticipated issues, we can continue adding new features as we have been and still come out ahead for all users. Again, this is what I and others have been pushing and promoting for years so I am again glad that you have finally agreed.

It's the inconsistency that is bothersome.