Return-Path: Delivered-To: new-httpd-archive@hyperreal.org Received: (qmail 26970 invoked by uid 6000); 13 Oct 1997 16:30:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 26950 invoked from network); 13 Oct 1997 16:30:45 -0000 Received: from valis.worldgate.com (marcs@198.161.84.2) by taz.hyperreal.org with SMTP; 13 Oct 1997 16:30:45 -0000 Received: from localhost (marcs@localhost) by valis.worldgate.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA03778 for ; Mon, 13 Oct 1997 10:30:24 -0600 (MDT) Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 10:30:24 -0600 (MDT) From: Marc Slemko To: new-httpd@apache.org Subject: Re: I'll be scarce. In-Reply-To: <34424C04.F00972C@algroup.co.uk> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org Status: O X-Status: I'm not sure that is practical. The problem is that then people have to do a wait for things to calm down, make sure the tree is ready for a beta or whatever release, do the release, get going again for _both_ NT and Unix releases. That means you end up with twice as much hassle. On Mon, 13 Oct 1997, Ben Laurie wrote: > Marc Slemko wrote: > > > > On Mon, 13 Oct 1997, Ben Laurie wrote: > > > > > > > > I agree. I can't see a problem with releasing Unix and NT > > > asynchronously. It's unlikely to be possible to be exactly synchronous, > > > anyway. > > > > I'm not sure I understand the idea. > > > > Are you saying we release a 5.2b40 but only for NT, then the next release > > is 5.2b41 but only for Unix, then b42 and b43 are only NT, etc.? > > Yes. Of course, if we happen to do both at the same time, that's great. > > Cheers, > > Ben. > > -- > Ben Laurie |Phone: +44 (181) 735 0686|Apache Group member > Freelance Consultant |Fax: +44 (181) 735 0689|http://www.apache.org > and Technical Director|Email: ben@algroup.co.uk |Apache-SSL author > A.L. Digital Ltd, |http://www.algroup.co.uk/Apache-SSL > London, England. |"Apache: TDG" http://www.ora.com/catalog/apache >