apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Trawick <traw...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: svn commit: r906987 - /apr/apr/branches/1.3.x/build/buildcheck.sh
Date Fri, 05 Feb 2010 19:40:48 GMT
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 1:37 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. <wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> On 2/5/2010 10:25 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
>>>
>>> I noticed this when reviewing the 1.3.10 tarballs (still on my
>>> machine).  Should I retag 1.3.10 to avoid potential user confusion?
>>
>> or just skip 1.3.10 and call it 1.3.11; I don't care either way
>>
>> (If I hadn't sat back so long watching Bill crank these suckers out
>> I'd be done.  Thanks, Bill!)
>
> A PITA, huh?  :)  I would suggest simply rerolling with this change;
> "No C sources were harmed in the creation of this tarball".
>
> But that's just my 2c, others might disagree.

I can pre-empt most concerns with the "version numbers are cheap" method.

(Step 0. Review changes since the last release; fix or ask about
anything suspicious.)

Mime
View raw message