Comment 14 for bug 1750356

> This is a bug.

I'm not interested in arguments about semantics. My point is that from the point of view of the proposed code change it's the implementation of a new feature, with all the wide-ranging changes and regression risk that goes with it.

> This meant we had to support the older fields unchanged, while at the same time introducing new compliant fields. This is well established and well understood at httpd and is not out of the ordinary.

Ah - do you represent upstream? Part of my issue is in gaining confidence that the patch does the right thing in the absence of the rest of upstream microrelease changes. If someone familiar with the patch can vouch for it, that would help.