httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From (Robert S. Thau)
Subject Re: patch list vote
Date Tue, 21 Mar 1995 10:11:08 GMT
   From: (Cliff Skolnick)
   Date: Tue, 21 Mar 1995 01:50:56 PST

   [... stuff omitted ...] This could be an interesting

   1) Everyone whacks up a pre-alpha release (as has been happening)

   2) I take that release (post-vote) clean things up, verify that
   the fix is pretty much cool accross as many platforms that I know.
   I also check up on the engineering soundness like what the hell
   will this do to the OS.

   3) I follow the "pre-alpha" with an alpha,beta,etc. (week or two later?)
   (week in this case)

   [... more stuff omitted ...]

   Does this sound good with everyone?


I'm not sure I like the timing --- it looks like you want things to
stand still for a week after "pre-alpha" while you turn it into
"alpha".  As you've observed, things are finally moving around here,
and I'd like to see them keep moving.  I'm actually hoping for weekly
"pre-alpha" releases, at least for a little while.

Moreover, the logistics of dealing with wholesale "cleanups" would
pose problems for me.  I've got this large body of code (guess what)
which I'm currently carrying from release to release, and which is
currently *not* yet in shape for integration into core Apache.
Widespread cleanups which would break context diffs would make this
significantly more difficult for me to manage.  (This has already
screwed me badly on B27, which was originally made against someone
else's slightly "cleaned-up" working sources, and thus didn't work on
base code).

In any case, there's a nontrivial probability that we'll want to
transition to an NCSA 1.4 code base in the not too distant future
(i.e., weeks).  This would be easier if we avoided gratuitous changes
from the base code for the moment --- I haven't seen 1.4 code yet, but
I understand it still has a lot in common with 1.3.  (BTW, it's an
interesting exercise to talk to the 1.4 server running on hoohoo since
at least last Thursday; it's a great deal more solid than the last
time we poked at it).

Finally, I'd prefer it, just on general procedural grounds, if your
changes went through the same review procedure as everything else.
(This looks fairly easy to me, since under the above model, they will
in effect be patches made to a "pre-alpha" which was built by someone
else.  I know it's a bit of a bother to package them up as a series of
patches, instead of just presenting the final "cleaned up" files, but
you can do it as you go --- besides, we're all doing it).  Is there
any reason why this would pose a significant problem for you?


View raw message