Github user bgaff commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/214#discussion_r31977617
--- Diff: lib/atscppapi/src/include/atscppapi/Transaction.h ---
@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@
#include "atscppapi/shared_ptr.h"
#include
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/216#issuecomment-116437793
@jacksontj sounds like it should be fine.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/240#issuecomment-117899443
I reviewed this and iterated with @jacksontj and so obviously I give this a
+1, @SolidWallOfCode can you please take a look at this latest version?
---
If your
Github user bgaff commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/240#discussion_r33836997
--- Diff: iocore/hostdb/HostDB.cc ---
@@ -2833,15 +2650,8 @@ ParseHostFile(char const *path)
}
}
- if (!HostFilePairs.empty
Github user bgaff commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/241#discussion_r34001015
--- Diff: iocore/net/SSLUtils.cc ---
@@ -308,8 +308,10 @@ set_context_cert(SSL *ssl)
if (ctx != NULL) {
SSL_set_SSL_CTX(ssl, ctx
GitHub user bgaff opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/245
Add ListAll for HostDB httpui endpoint
We would like a way to enumerate all records in hostdb (this doesn't
include the hostsfile map, although adding that would be a trivial chang
Github user bgaff commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/245#discussion_r34431849
--- Diff: iocore/hostdb/HostDB.cc ---
@@ -1037,6 +1037,33 @@ HostDBProcessor::getbyname_imm(Continuation *cont,
process_hostdb_info_pfn proce
Github user bgaff commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/245#discussion_r34431846
--- Diff: iocore/hostdb/HostDB.cc ---
@@ -1801,6 +1828,39 @@ HostDBContinuation::do_put_response(ClusterMachine
*m, HostDBInfo *r, Continuati
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/245#issuecomment-120851447
All, I've incorporated @SolidWallOfCode 's feedback which renames the
method to iterate / iterateEvent, additionally i've modified the code to
res
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/257#issuecomment-123178740
I worked with @zizhong on this pull request and it looks good to me.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/258#issuecomment-123178803
I worked with @zizhong on this pull request and it looks good to me.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/258#issuecomment-123589377
Hi @ericcarlschwartz , if you're cool with he proposed patch I'll land this
one and we can close out TS-2152 as a dupe.
---
If your project is set up f
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/262#issuecomment-125088153
Hey @zwoop , mind taking a look? This current iteration was my suggestion
as the easiest way to handle this edge case. @jacksontj has also created a test
case for
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/262#issuecomment-125250884
@jpeach , what are you supposed to do without any resolvers?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/262#issuecomment-125851594
I'm happy with this implementation, if the user does something stupid like
specify a resolv conf that is nonexistent or doesn't contain any resolvers the
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/262#issuecomment-128275994
@SolidWallOfCode @jpeach are you guys okay with this current iteration? If
we don't have any objections I'll get this merged.
---
If your project is set
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/271#issuecomment-128352032
I worked with @zizhong on this patch and so obviously I give it a +1.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/271#issuecomment-128533986
Great, I'm glad everyone is on board. Zizhong actually made sure to add a
test to validate the case where the server sends a content-length. But I do see
now
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/271#issuecomment-128559255
I've merged this into master, I'll now backport it to 6.0.x
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/270#issuecomment-130105002
I'm in agreement with @ushachar and @sudheerv on this one, I do not
believe webdav methods should land in the core.
---
If your project is set up for it, yo
Github user bgaff closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/245
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature
GitHub user bgaff opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/300
TS-3956: Header_rewrite applies strange logic with = operator
Please see ticket TS-3956 for more information, I'm using github here so
that @zwoop / @jacksontj can provide a code r
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/300#issuecomment-145712386
@zwoop yah unit tests should be pretty easy to add.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/300#issuecomment-145743518
After looking into this, testing doesn't really make sense in a regression
test so what i'll do is just drop in another source file called parser_tests.cc
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/300#issuecomment-145744298
Any other comments on the implementation before I land it?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/300#issuecomment-145764790
I managed to screw up the diff in the second commit ;/ I'm gonna land the
code change and tests (obviously not screwed up like that) ;)
---
If your project i
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/301#issuecomment-146427348
@zwoop @jpeach @SolidWallOfCode mind doing a review for me?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/302#issuecomment-146719893
@dmorilha , thanks!
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/301#issuecomment-151006054
@jpeach , the approach you're describing sounds incredibly complex given
the problem we're trying to solve.
---
If your project is set up for it, you ca
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/301#issuecomment-151378498
Ok @jpeach : i'll bite on the proposal to allow server to send a message to
manager, perhaps the most general purpose way to do this is to allow server to
sp
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/323#issuecomment-153948633
I don't see an issue w/ this, I'll merge it if no one else has issues.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
re
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/323#issuecomment-153950509
@jpeach the only way to deal with that would be a mutex that protects
initialization and destruction. The problem is that these objects are
constructed via static
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/323#issuecomment-153955267
these objects should _never_ go out of scope until the process dies (they
live on a freelist), so isn't it enough just to do nothing in the destructor?
-
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/323#issuecomment-153956235
@jpeach , given that we follow an init() / clear() pattern anyway, what are
your thoughts on that actually: just remove the call to clear() from the
destructor
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/323#issuecomment-153956757
Cool, sounds like we're on the same page @jpeach.
@canselcik, you also cool w/ this proposal?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/324#issuecomment-154329941
This has proven to be very useful for us. I've reviewed the patch and
obviously am comfortable with it, it'd be great to get the autoconf expert
@Solid
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/340#issuecomment-157165638
@canselcik thanks, I'll merge this after the summit today.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on G
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/342#issuecomment-157899759
Looks good to me.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/344#issuecomment-158515283
I already have these changes locally that I'm about to commit you can close
this pull request
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this
GitHub user bgaff opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/345
TS-4034: Minor atscppapi cleanup
A few things should be cleaned up in atscppapi.
- CaseInsensitiveStringComparitor isn't used internally but it is exposed
in a public API, so be
GitHub user bgaff opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/351
TS-4042: Add feature to buffer request body before making downstream
requests
We need a way to examine the request body without making a downstream
request, this feature has many use cases
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/343#issuecomment-159467097
I think this is something that will be incredibly useful, thanks for
working on it.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/351#issuecomment-160427748
@jpeach sure thing. Does anyone else have comments regarding the approach
before we discuss the individual APIs?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can
Github user bgaff commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/357#discussion_r46250788
--- Diff: plugins/experimental/ts_lua/ts_lua_client_request.c ---
@@ -332,6 +348,10 @@ ts_lua_client_request_get_pristine_url(lua_State *L
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/324#issuecomment-161184930
@jpeach , if you're good, I'll land this.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as wel
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/351#issuecomment-162403177
@sudheerv , the chunked encoding case is one that I don't think any browser
actually does, have you ever seen a browser make a request w/ chunked encoding
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/351#issuecomment-162415337
@sudheerv, I've asked @zizhong to help in addressing the transfer-encoding
chunked case, we should have an update soon.
---
If your project is set up for it
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/324#issuecomment-162476486
Hey @jpeach I'm gonna land this within the next day (rebased into a single
commit), unless you have any other questions or concerns? But after my review
it ap
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/351#issuecomment-164333421
@sudheerv / @jpeach this pull request has been updated w/ tests for the
chunked encoding case that @sudheerv was concerned about. Please let me know if
you have
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/301#issuecomment-164354501
@jpeach I reviewed this latest commit and it lgtm. If you're cool w/ this
please go ahead and land it, otherwise I'm happy to do it in the next day or so
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/351#issuecomment-164477595
That's correct since both use fetchsm if just works like a normal http 1.1
request, as that's what fetch sm is. I've verified this functionality
Github user bgaff commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/393#discussion_r48644527
--- Diff: plugins/experimental/webp_transform/compress.cc ---
@@ -0,0 +1,198 @@
+/** @file
+
+ATSCPPAPI plugin to do webp transform
Github user bgaff commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/393#discussion_r48644607
--- Diff: plugins/experimental/webp_transform/compress.cc ---
@@ -0,0 +1,198 @@
+/** @file
+
+ATSCPPAPI plugin to do webp transform
Github user bgaff commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/393#discussion_r48644645
--- Diff: plugins/experimental/webp_transform/compress.cc ---
@@ -0,0 +1,198 @@
+/** @file
+
+ATSCPPAPI plugin to do webp transform
Github user bgaff commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/393#discussion_r48644738
--- Diff: plugins/experimental/webp_transform/metadata.cc ---
@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
+/**
+ Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
Github user bgaff commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/393#discussion_r48644849
--- Diff: plugins/experimental/webp_transform/compress.cc ---
@@ -0,0 +1,198 @@
+/** @file
+
+ATSCPPAPI plugin to do webp transform
Github user bgaff commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/393#discussion_r48644987
--- Diff: plugins/experimental/webp_transform/metadata.h ---
@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
+/**
+ Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/393#issuecomment-168113227
Just out of curiosity was some of this code taken as examples from the
libraries you're using? Also, it seems there is a lot of image specific code in
this p
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/351#issuecomment-168861430
Any other questions about this?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/262#issuecomment-168897096
@zizhong yah an Error might be more appropriate.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/262#issuecomment-168897439
@jpeach what "failure" are you referring to when we load resolve.conf?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
re
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/438#issuecomment-174847916
Yep definitely a typo.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/442#issuecomment-177737313
I'm okay with this, but I do have a comment on #443
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as
Github user bgaff commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/443#discussion_r51376076
--- Diff: lib/atscppapi/src/utils_internal.cc ---
@@ -61,19 +73,14 @@ handleTransactionEvents(TSCont cont, TSEvent event,
void *edata)
(void
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/443#issuecomment-177784854
@sudheerv got it. Might it make sense then just to remove the txn handle
caching and just look it up everywhere it's needed? But otherwise i'm :+1
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/443#issuecomment-178554333
Why would this need to go in 7.0? it'd be a fully backwards compatible
change and could really land at any point.
---
If your project is set up for it, yo
Github user bgaff commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/435#discussion_r51563391
--- Diff: lib/atscppapi/src/Transaction.cc ---
@@ -186,6 +186,20 @@ Transaction::setErrorBody(const std::string &page)
TSHttpTxnErrorBod
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/443#issuecomment-178565238
If the handles change then they wouldn't be valid to use anyway so I'm not
sure that we need to worry about that, right?
---
If your project is set up f
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/443#issuecomment-178570331
What I'm suggesting is actually pulling the handles when you do something
that accesses them...but I suppose what this PR is doing is probably more
effi
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/443#issuecomment-178572544
Sounds good :+1:
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/435#issuecomment-179032182
This looks good to me. :+1: Thanks!
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/479#issuecomment-184495815
:+1: looks good to me.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not
Github user bgaff commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/481#discussion_r52969591
--- Diff: lib/ts/ink_queue.cc ---
@@ -200,19 +200,20 @@ freelist_new(InkFreeList *f)
if (TO_PTR(FREELIST_POINTER(item)) == NULL
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/481#issuecomment-184524565
All good :+1: just set alignment = 0 on declaration and let the complier
deal with it if it's always assigned later.
---
If your project is set up for it, yo
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/481#issuecomment-184527976
I just confirmed that this is correct, it will actually be hugepage aligned.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply
Github user bgaff commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/393#discussion_r53425864
--- Diff: plugins/experimental/webp_transform/ImageTransform.cc ---
@@ -0,0 +1,109 @@
+/**
+ Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/393#issuecomment-186076071
Wow, yes this much cleaner by using ImageMagik. I'm :+1: with this. Anyone
else have comments?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/489#issuecomment-186464921
What about the equivalents to posix_memalign?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/489#issuecomment-186976913
@PSUdaemon malloc guarantees 8 byte alignment, fwiw. This still perseveres
8 byte alignment assuming sizeof(size_t) remains 8 bytes.
---
If your project is set up
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/489#issuecomment-186980985
Ahh yes, you're correct @PSUdaemon . Nonetheless you cannot move the size_t
to the end because how would you find it given a raw pointer?
But @jpea
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/489#issuecomment-186991246
> Feels hacky though.
Maybe something like jemalloc would be better solution to this problem as
@jpeach has suggested.
---
If your project is set up
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/523#issuecomment-195615069
I'm not sure this fixes TS4207 but this is a good patch regardless. +1 from
me.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/541#issuecomment-202656925
I worked with @shenzhang920 on this and it looks good to me. :+1: from me.
@zwoop , mind taking a look?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/541#issuecomment-202657737
This is actually how haproxy and nginx behave by default, this config
option is disabled by default for backwards compatibility.
---
If your project is set up for
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/549#issuecomment-206109679
Yah this makes sense :+1:
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/554#issuecomment-206675022
I did the original fix for this bug and this missed case definitely makes
sense. I'm :+1: with the fix. The only thing that looks a little weird is
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/555#issuecomment-206689366
:+1: ink_strlcpy will deal with the null terminator, looks good.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/408#issuecomment-206707235
Yes, let me take a look.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/408#issuecomment-206707463
Would it be possible to see an example test using these Mocks?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on
GitHub user bgaff opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/556
Adding STL Allocator which uses io bufs
This is something that seems to come up at every summit and I always
promise to prototype it. Ahead of the next summit I'd like to begin discus
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/556#issuecomment-207478918
@zwoop @bcall no problem I'll update this with h2 as the example use case.
@jpeach removing the TSDebug is no problem and I'm very open to naming
sugge
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/556#issuecomment-207948866
@zwoop / @bryancall , @sudheerv was right there isn't much standard library
usage in the h2 code. But i'll work on exposing similar logic for plugins.
-
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/541#issuecomment-208488556
@jpeach I looked into the idea of using ParseRules.cc and CompileParseRules
with @shenzhang920 but it does't look like there are any free bits at the
m
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/561#issuecomment-208575789
:+1:
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/564#issuecomment-208754987
:eyes: I'm on it.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/541#issuecomment-209687483
:+1: This looks good to me, one concern would be the bit name is_uri, can
we find a more descriptive name for this bit? Also, @shenzhang920 you also
confirmed
GitHub user bgaff opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/569
TS-4340: Fix origin max connections
This fixes issues related to max origin connections and makes them honor
the same server matching config that is used for server session pools
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/541#issuecomment-209696367
Thanks @shenzhang920
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/564#issuecomment-210074340
@jacksontj I'm going to merge my pull request, can you please update yours
once my code lands? Thanks
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to
Github user bgaff closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/569
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature
1 - 100 of 174 matches
Mail list logo
