Mark, On 9/10/13 11:43 AM, Mark Thomas wrote: > On 10/09/2013 15:44, schu...@apache.org wrote: >> Author: schultz >> Date: Tue Sep 10 14:44:15 2013 >> New Revision: 1521514 >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1521514 >> Log: >> Fix https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54691 >> >> Add configuration property "protocols" alias: "sslEnabledProtocols" >> Document the as-yet-undocumented property (only documented >> sslEnabledProtocols, to match Tomcat 7/8 documentation). >> >> Modified: >> tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk/java/org/apache/catalina/connector/Connector.java >> tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk/webapps/docs/changelog.xml >> tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk/webapps/docs/config/http.xml > > This is Tomcat 6 which is RTC not CTR. There should have been a proposal > in the status file with 3 +1 votes before this was applied.
Yipes. > Retrospectively, you have my +1. Well. Shall I do things properly and revert the patch, make a proposal, etc. or can I get a vote by acclimation and avoid the svn acrobatics? I'm okay with reverting... I just wanted to avoid it if it didn't really matter (code change is quite trivial after all) and the team was okay with it. Thanks, -chris
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
