committed

PATCHES ACCEPTED TO BACKPORT FROM TRUNK:

  [ start all new proposals below, under PATCHES PROPOSED. ]

  *) Rather than odds-and-ends applied out of order, proposing we revert

     r1757240, r1757256, r1757295, r1758671, r1758672, r1775232, all of

     which is now recorded in the 2.2.x-merge-http-strict branch, and

     bring that branch back into 2.2.x for 2.2.32 release.

     Merges;

       -c-1775232 .

       -c-1757672 .

       -c-1757671 .

       -c-1757295 .

       -c-1757256 .

       -c-1757240 .

     [here we are back at 2.2.32-dev bump]

       -r1775685:1775780 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x-merge-http-strict/

     Roll-up patch of the above (not recommended for casual reading, these

     would be committed individually as noted above... but for only for sanity

     testing the end result. Due to intervening CHANGES/ap_mmn changes, there

     is small delta after reverting the above...)

       https://raw.githubusercontent.com/wrowe/patches/master/httpd-2.2-HEAD-http-protocol-strict.patch

       This patch above does *NOT* apply to the 2.2.31 release, c.f. the delta

       of the 2.2.x-merge-http-strict branch for that information. This is for

       folks who are testing rollbacks plus 2.4.x activity against 2.2.x HEAD!

       Sorry to start from scratch, but yann's correct observation was correct,

       that nothing will apply out-of-order, and everything on 2.2 branch had

       already become disordered.

     +1: wrowe, covener, ylavic

     covener: 

       - need to rebase patch on branch to pick up one-liner changes in

         r1777178 and r1777182

     ylavic:

        httpd-2.2-HEAD-http-protocol-strict.patch + r1777178 + r1777182 worked,

        but not the former procedure (merge conflicts).

     wrowe asks: covener, would you apply? I'd like to have at least a second

                 pair of hands and eyes on merging this to branches/2.2.x and

                 am happy to compare/verify against my working copy.

PATCHES PROPOSED TO BACKPORT FROM TRUNK:

  [ New proposals should be added at the end of the list ]