From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ken Dreyer Subject: civetweb upstream Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2015 08:28:46 -0700 Message-ID: <54D4DDAE.50604@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:45679 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754447AbbBFP2s (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Feb 2015 10:28:48 -0500 Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t16FSlat009818 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2015 10:28:47 -0500 Received: from mbp.ktdreyer.com (vpn-62-164.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.62.164]) by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t16FSlAY026340 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2015 10:28:47 -0500 Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: "ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org" Hi folks, It looks like Ceph has its own fork of the upstream civetweb project. What was the reason for forking at the time? Has there been much effort to get our civetweb changes upstream? - Ken