From 06121379c50d1aa572dc36e0978b5450d7f0a0f3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Colm MacCarthaigh <colm@apache.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 16:25:22 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] Add a note on why the fprintf's are there

git-svn-id: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/branches/1.3.x@395297 13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68
---
 STATUS | 4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)

diff --git a/STATUS b/STATUS
index 02fdb4285d8..872d9e24d47 100644
--- a/STATUS
+++ b/STATUS
@@ -79,6 +79,10 @@ PROPOSED PATCHES FOR THIS RELEASE:
       http://people.apache.org/~colm/include_directive-1.3.patch
       +1: colm, wrowe
       -0: jim (do we *really* want those fprintfs?)
+        Colm says: The ap_process_include_config function is 
+        a direct copy of ap_process_resource_config(), warts
+        and all. That's where the fprintf's come from; it's
+        existing behaviour.
 
 RELEASE NON-SHOWSTOPPERS BUT WOULD BE REAL NICE TO WRAP THESE UP:
 
-- 
2.47.2