httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dean Gaudet <>
Subject Re: [CFV]: mod_speling revived
Date Sat, 09 Aug 1997 01:31:25 GMT
Actually the best choice in my opinion is to rename apachen to apache-1_3,
and then start using that as the repository.  We should *not* be using the
name "apache" any longer because otherwise people with checked out working
copies of code against the current "apache" cannot easily upgrade.  They
also may screw things up committing code against the wrong repository.

For that matter, after 1.2.2 is released I would heartily sanction the
creation of apache-1_2, and the lopping off of HEAD from there, and the
re-routing of the 1.2 branch to be HEAD on apache-1_2... I wish I had
listened to Roy and Marc's advice about this ages ago.  Working on the
apache 1.2 branch is really slow now that there's so many extra revisions
in head (branches are rebuilt by applying all the changes in reverse from
HEAD back to branch point, and then apply changes forward on the branch
...  this is like 40 or 50 patches for some files). 

Once apache-1_3 is created, and everyone has used one of my various
suggestions for bringing over working changes, then the current apache
repository should be frozen -- remove group and user write access to all
directories.  (You can't do this earlier, because lame cvs requires write
permission even to "cvs update".) 

So to summarize:

- rename apachen to apache-1_3
- bring apache-1_3 up to date with latest RCS files from apache
- cp apache apache-1_2
- do a bunch of rcs crap to convert the 1.2 branch in apache-1_2 into the
- wait two weeks, vigilantly watching for mistaken commits on apache
- make apache read-only


On Fri, 8 Aug 1997, Alexei Kosut wrote:

> On Fri, 8 Aug 1997, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> > Brian Behlendorf wrote:
> > > 
> > > What's remaining on that?  We really really should do it.  I think
> > > everyone's afraid to work in the "apachen" tree to avoid stepping on Paul's
> > > feet... 
> > > 
> > 
> > Well, I'd like to start work on pushing for a 1.3b1 release in about 7-14
> > days. I think there are enough votes to carry the source re-org of
> > apachen.
> Well, don't forget that we can't just copy apachen to apache and have it
> work, becuase apachen is several weeks out of date. We need to start with
> apache and remake it into the reorganized form. Paul will likely have to
> do this.
> And, as (I believe) Ralf pointed out, we should cp apache to apache-old
> or something, so we can check out the old format if need be. Actually,
> what might be good is for the files which exit in both organisations (the
> *.c and *.h files, mainly) to be symlinked (or hard-linked) between
> apache and apache-old. That way you could check out 1.2.x from
> apache-old, and any commits to the source would show up in the apache
> files.
> But that could get odd.
> -- Alexei Kosut <>

View raw message