httpd-apreq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Steve Hay" <Steve...@planit.com>
Subject RE: [RELEASE CANDIDATE] libapreq 1.34-RC4
Date Wed, 07 Jan 2009 13:54:48 GMT
I didn't vote because AFAIK I don't actually have a vote. I have commit
access, but I'm not a PMC member and therefore have no vote. Is that
correct?
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Issac Goldstand [mailto:margol@beamartyr.net] 
Sent: 07 January 2009 13:24
Cc: APREQ List
Subject: Re: [RELEASE CANDIDATE] libapreq 1.34-RC4

*ping*

I don't actually see a vote from Steeve - just an advisory that it seems
OK.  I did vote +1, and am ready to roll (after having a baby boy +
getting the flu twice; it's been a busy month ;)) as soon as I see a 3rd
binding vote.

Since steevehay does seem positive, I'm going to start tagging and
rolling, but won't upload or announce until I formally close the vote

  Issac

Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
> Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
>> Issac Goldstand wrote:
>>> http://people.apache.org/~issac/libapreq-1.34-RC4.tar.gz
>> Unit tests blow up spectacularly on solaris 2.10 but I don't think we

>> support that and is related to Request.so failing to load.
>>
>> It does compile.
>>
>> I'll get a freebsd test for some sanity in the nearish future here.
>>
>> I wouldn't worry about the solaris blow ups (1.33 doesn't work
either)
>>
>>
> Nothing liked getting pissed off to get things to work.
> (I believe the only difference I did was -httpd vs -apxs)
>
> All tests successful.
> Files=4, Tests=25,  3 wallclock secs ( 1.22 cusr +  0.17 csys =  1.39 
> CPU)
>
> Solaris 2.10
> apache 1.3.41
> mod_perl 1.30
> perl 5.8.8
>
> so thats a +1
>
> Neither of Steve's changes are to apreq itself so they don't block the

> release.
>
> +1: stevenhay, pgollucci
> +0:
> -0:
> -1:
>
> ISSAC did you vote ? if you do we get the required votes.
>
> If do the release, make sure you send the e-mails from an @apache.org 
> e-mail.
>





Mime
View raw message