httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul Richards <p.richa...@elsevier.co.uk>
Subject Re: something to think about for 2.0...
Date Thu, 10 Apr 1997 18:53:39 GMT
Alexei Kosut <akosut@nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us> writes:

> I personally like the beta-cycle routine we have now; regardless, the
> next version should be 1.2b9/1.2.0. 1.2.8 is not a valid option
> IMO. If we want to scratch the betas, that's okay (I guess), but it
> should be called 1.2.0.

> As for the 1.2/2.0 distinction, I vote +1 on (1), +0 on (2). I think
> that we should not start work on 2.0 until we believe 1.2 to be
> "done". Of course, bug fixes can still be applied. I think we're
> nearing completion of 1.2 at any rate (within a month).

Holding up 2.0 until 1.2 was done has been a big mistake. Some people
just aren't cut out for release engineering and just can't stop
themselves from making that "trivial last minute" change. 1.2b8 is far
worse than 1.2 was in terms of reliability and huge numbers of
fundamental changes have been made during the course of the beta
cycle.

The tree should have been branched straight away and one or two people
assigned the task of managing the release tree while everyone else got
on with development.

I know I keep harping on about FreeBSD but really guys, it's a
complete OS which is at least one order of magnitude more complex
than Apache and it gets released far more frequently and the beta
release gets more stable not less stable.

I'd vote to split the tree now and have a small release team do proper
release engineering on the release branch.


-- 
  Dr Paul Richards. [p.richards@elsevier.co.uk]
  Originative Solutions Ltd.  [paul@originat.demon.co.uk]
  Phone: 0370 462071 (Mobile), +44 (0)1865 843155 (Elsevier)

Mime
View raw message