httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From c...@decus.org (Rodent of Unusual Size)
Subject Re: 1.2.2 vs 1.2.3??
Date Tue, 12 Aug 1997 09:34:29 GMT
>From the fingers of Ralf S. Engelschall flowed the following:
>
>Ok, some of us decided that the rolled pre-releases for 1.2.2 could lead to
>confusion  because of the missing -dev in the version number. I accept this
>and have to say sorry. So, we should roll a new pre-release for in-depth
>testing with a concrete platform list. I spent some time and prepared a new
>STATUS 1.2.3 message but don't want to post it as such because only three
>members (Marc, Ken and Ben) said they really want 1.2.3. 

    In the absence of a veto that constitutes a quorum.  Add Lars, too -
    that makes four.

>So, to avoid any more confusion (for the case all others really want 1.2.2 and
>not 1.2.3!) please give your votes wheter we should go on as stated in the
>above STATUS message.

    You mean the one below? <g>  +1, with changes as noted.

>STATUS for Apache 1.2.3
>=======================
>
>Release Status:
>
>    o IMPORTANT:
>      So now we treat 1.2.2 as a never released version which existed only for
>      internal tests and bumped up the version number to 1.2.3-dev.  A new
>      pre-release was rolled again. Now correctly tagged 1.2.3-dev!! We now
>      start a real test cycle with 1.2.3-dev for the various platform (see
>      table below).

    As long as the internal version number stays "1.2.3-dev" until the
    atomic tag-roll-and-release, goodness.

>      ftp://dev.apache.org/pub/httpd/dist/apache_1.2.3-dev/

    Erm, well, I tried to fetch it but it doesn't exist yet.  Teach me
    to turn my clock ahead!

>    => ** PLEASE TEST IT NOW YOURSELF AND THEN YOUR TEST TO THE TABLE.
>       ** IF ALL GOES WELL WE CAN ROLL THE FINAL 1.2.3 TARBALL IN A FEW DAYS.

    Table looks good to me..  For 1.2.0 we committed to a bunch of
    binaries.  Should we make that commitment for 1.2.3?  If we do, we
    should get our collective act together wrt signatures, compiled-in
    modules, and README files.  A separate message follows on that
    topic..

>    o Still known problems with compilation and/or runtime:
>      (When any occur we fix it immediatley in 1.2.3-dev
>       and roll a new pre-release)

    New item (not sure if it's in the 1.2 branch or not): Brian's report
    of Dean's bug du jour <g> with contneg on DirectoryIndex and vhosts.
    If the patch that introduced this was applied to the 1.2 branch, we
    should hold up 1.2.3 until Dean fixes it.  Brian, can you run a
    1.2.x server parallel to the one where you encountered this (same
    config files) and see if the bug's in 1.2.[23]-dev?

    #ken    :-)}

Mime
View raw message