Bug 164477

Summary:	Package is incorrectly named (confusing)
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4	Reporter:	Jason Bradley Nance <jbnance>
Component:	mod_ssl	Assignee:	Joe Orton <jorton>
Status:	CLOSED NOTABUG	QA Contact:
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	4.0	Keywords:	FutureFeature
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Enhancement
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2005-07-28 07:13:32 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Jason Bradley Nance 2005-07-28 05:13:18 UTC

From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20041013 Firefox/0.9.3 (Ubuntu)

Description of problem:
The "mod_ssl" that ships with RHEL isn't really mod_ssl (www.modssl.org) is it? Isn't it Apache-SSL (www.apache-ssl.org)?  I realize that there isn't a "mod_ssl" for Apache 2.0 and that it seems that in Apache 2.2 there is going to be an ASF "mod_ssl" (Apache-SSL renamed?), but right now this is all very confusing.  The rpm information points to httpd.apache.org for the URL, and the documentation on the ASF website seems to be cleaner/more complete, but wouldn't it make more sense to name the package httpd-ssl or something similar as to not add to the confusion?

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
mod_ssl-2.0.52-12.1

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. (clarity issue)
2.
3.
  

Additional info:

Comment 1 Joe Orton 2005-07-28 07:13:32 UTC

Thanks for contacting us.

The "mod_ssl" in httpd 2.0 is based on Ralf Engelschall's mod_ssl, so has a
legitimate claim to the name!  This FAQ entry describes the history:

http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.0/ssl/ssl_faq.html#history