More campaigning from those pesty developers wanting their code changes

approved for a small donation of time.  Just say no!  ;-)

git-svn-id: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/branches/APACHE_2_0_BRANCH@104839 13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68

diff --git a/STATUS b/STATUS
index 39e62160d9d5590711f97493bd770978567897f8..7a120f6a871933d6c0223b0940a2fbb9114cac77 100644 (file)
--- a/STATUS
+++ b/STATUS
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
 APACHE 2.0 STATUS:                                              -*-text-*-
-Last modified at [$Date: 2004/08/26 21:06:13 $]
+Last modified at [$Date: 2004/08/26 21:18:37 $]
 
 Release:
 
@@ -163,7 +163,10 @@ PATCHES TO BACKPORT FROM 2.1
        jerenkrantz asks: Isn't this what apr_table_merge is for?
        nd replies: yep. But cookies won't be merged, because browsers don't
                    support it.
-       +1: nd
+       jerenkrantz: Couldn't we copy the table and merge the values somehow?
+                    This just seems like a lot of code to duplicate what we
+                    have already.  *shrug*  Regardless, patch looks okay...
+       +1: nd, jerenkrantz
 
     *) Fix memory leak in mod_rewrite. PR 27862. (2.0 + 1.3)
          http://www.apache.org/~nd/mod_rewrite_fixleak.diff
@@ -186,7 +189,10 @@ PATCHES TO BACKPORT FROM 2.1
                     completely forgotten where.
         nd: we stop recursions in the core now (for subrequests and internal
             redirects). Therefore the check here is no longer necessary.
-       +1: nd
+       jerenkrantz: Aha.  ap_is_recursion_limit_exceeded() is the function
+                    I was thinking of, but couldn't find.  (I was searching for
+                    'recursive' not 'recursion'.)
+       +1: nd, jerenkrantz
 
     *) mod_dav: Send an EOS at the end of the multistatus brigade.
        http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/httpd-2.0/modules/dav/main/mod_dav.c?r1=1.105&r2=1.106