httpd-cvs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From j..@hyperreal.org
Subject cvs commit: apache-1.3 STATUS
Date Tue, 14 Apr 1998 02:38:18 GMT
jim         98/04/13 19:38:17

  Modified:    .        STATUS
  Log:
  Minor 1.3b6 stuff and remove the idea about this
  being 1.3.0... no one voted for it and now with the Great
  Renaming, a beta test is really required
  
  Revision  Changes    Path
  1.294     +3 -15     apache-1.3/STATUS
  
  Index: STATUS
  ===================================================================
  RCS file: /export/home/cvs/apache-1.3/STATUS,v
  retrieving revision 1.293
  retrieving revision 1.294
  diff -u -r1.293 -r1.294
  --- STATUS	1998/04/12 15:49:24	1.293
  +++ STATUS	1998/04/14 02:38:16	1.294
  @@ -2,7 +2,8 @@
   
   Release:
   
  -    1.3b6: freeze; release proposed for Friday, April 17
  +    1.3b6: freeze; release proposed for Friday, April 17. Need
  +           a RM (if no one volunteers, Jim will do it).
       1.3b5: Tagged APACHE_1_3b5 and released
   
       2.0  : In pre-alpha development, see apache-2.0 repository
  @@ -278,18 +279,6 @@
   	best interest to continue to support Unix to its utmost, and not delay
   	a release of 1.3.0 waiting for WIN32 issues to be resolved.
   
  -	Proposal: the next release should be named 1.3.0 and should be labelled
  -	    "stable on unix, beta on NT".
  -	    +1: 
  -	    -0: Ralf (because we've done a lot of good but new stuff
  -		      in 1.3b6-dev now and we should give us at least
  -		      one pre-release before the so-called "release" [1.3.0].
  -		      But we should not take again many months. 1.3.0 should
  -		      be kicked out as soon as possible after 1.3b6 is out. So
  -		      we should commit APACI, test a few days again, release
  -		      1.3b6, look for the responses, fix a few bugs and then
  -		      roll 1.3.0 out of the door marked as stated above)
  -
   	Proposal: the next release should be named 1.3b6, and labelled "release
   	    candidate on unix, beta on NT".  The release after that will be
   	    called 1.3.0 "stable on unix, beta on NT".
  @@ -297,8 +286,7 @@
   	    +0: 
   
               Notes:
  -            Randy: APACI should go in a beta release if it is to go in at all.
  -                   I would also argue that 1.3b6 is _not_ stable. I've been 
  +            Randy: I would also argue that 1.3b6 is _not_ stable. I've been 
                      having real fits keeping it alive on a dual processor
                      machine. Could be OS problems..
   
  
  
  

Mime
View raw message