Re: Fedora Legacy Test Update Notification: httpd and mod_ssl
|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
On Oct 24, 2005, at 11:29 PM, Jim Popovitch wrote:
Yes, but for rh9 and up both mod_ssl and httpd are built from one SRPM - httpd.Jeff Sheltren wrote:Hi Jim, perhaps some of your confusion comes from the fact that rh9, fc1, and fc2 all contain the mod_ssl package as part of the httpd package. In the older rh 7.3, mod_ssl was separate from apache.According to the release notes, 2 binary rpm packages were released (both mod_ssl and httpd) for all FL platforms except rh73.
To excuse this as "Other's checked before asking" is not accurate as the data just isn't there to support even having the ability to check. Show me discussions of this bug outside of a bugID that isn't referenced anywhere else. And please don't suggest that I am to be trolling bugzilla every day for the hundreds of packages for which I may or may not be interested in knowing if a bug exists.OK, sounds like you're just upset because you didn't see this until the updates-testing notification. I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say here.The bottom line is that I regularly keep on top of RH73 bugs/ updates/patches and I missed this. OK, so I am human and subject to errors, but this bug stayed well below the FL radar for many months. I have a pretty good record of downloading and testing updates, so the fact that this critical one slipped by alarms me.What I am trying to say is this:I try very hard to contribute what I can to Fedora Legacy. Yet despite my best efforts I find it amazingly difficult to do anything other than simply testing released packages. I try to stay on top of server related issues pertaining to RH7.3, things exactly like mod_ssl and htttpd. Yet this particular issue stayed buried out of sight (again, someone please show me some recent discussion or non-hidden notes regarding this).Rather than continuing to poke this fire, I am going to (once again) ask all those involved to help make the process saner and clearer so that those that want to help will be able to help. Don't hide below the radar and then complain in other threads that people aren't contributing.'nuf said.
OK, that's perfectly valid. And I'm very happy that you help out with testing packages - in fact, I think that package QA is where we need the most help. But I do disagree with you about this issue being "buried out of sight". All work on this bug was done using bugzilla where the ticket has been open for anyone to view (you don't even need to sign in). In fact, I count comments there from seven different people, which is more than most other FL bugs I've dealt with.
So, to me this is not "hiding" at all. But I would be interested to hear if you have any ideas for implementing your suggestion of making things easier for people to help.
-Jeff -- fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
[Fedora Development] [Fedora Announce] [Fedora Legacy Announce] [Fedora Config] [PAM] [Fedora General Discussion] [Big List of Linux Books] [Gimp] [Free Internet Dating] [Yosemite Questions]