Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 42722 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2007 18:07:59 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Sep 2007 18:07:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 98006 invoked by uid 500); 4 Sep 2007 18:07:53 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 97743 invoked by uid 500); 4 Sep 2007 18:07:52 -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 97732 invoked by uid 99); 4 Sep 2007 18:07:52 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 11:07:52 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.2 required=10.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [64.202.165.183] (HELO smtpauth03.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net) (64.202.165.183) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 18:07:48 +0000 Received: (qmail 7910 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2007 18:07:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (24.15.193.17) by smtpauth03.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (64.202.165.183) with ESMTP; 04 Sep 2007 18:07:24 -0000 Message-ID: <46DD9EDB.8010505@rowe-clan.net> Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2007 13:07:23 -0500 From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (X11/20070719) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@apr.apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release apr 0.9.16 / 1.2.11 --- apr-util 0.9.15 / 1.2.10 References: <46DCBAC7.4060008@rowe-clan.net> <46DD8B58.4070203@rowe-clan.net> In-Reply-To: <46DD8B58.4070203@rowe-clan.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > > Thanks all who've tested so far, I won't be leaving the vote open all that > long, given the quick show of support for this release, and the minimal > delta from the last abandoned but well-tested candidate. Oh - does anyone see a reason to leave this release vote open longer than 24 hours - considering the very small delta from the abandoned candidates and the extended review cycle of the abandoned candidates? If so please holler today :) Bill