Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 42897 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2007 12:00:30 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 13 Aug 2007 12:00:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 16911 invoked by uid 500); 13 Aug 2007 12:00:26 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 16860 invoked by uid 500); 13 Aug 2007 12:00:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 16849 invoked by uid 99); 13 Aug 2007 12:00:26 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 13 Aug 2007 05:00:26 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [209.133.199.10] (HELO jimsys.jagunet.com) (209.133.199.10) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 13 Aug 2007 12:00:34 +0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jimsys.jagunet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C08349BBD96; Mon, 13 Aug 2007 08:00:02 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <46BFEE47.4030602@rowe-clan.net> References: <46BFEE47.4030602@rowe-clan.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: Cc: dev@apr.apache.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Jim Jagielski Subject: Re: Roll 0.9.15 this week? Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 08:00:01 -0400 To: "William A. Rowe, Jr." X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.2) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Aug 13, 2007, at 1:38 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > Jim's spearheaded an effort to release httpd-2.0.60 and we've > discovered a set of socket issues that need to be corrected by > apr-0.9.15. > > I'd love to roll that on Tues eve/Wed am - but want to be sure, > are we happy with the resolutions of our Darwin/utf8 issues, and > are those yet to be applied? > I will double check here, on 10.4.10