httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ben Laurie <>
Subject Re: Possible suggested schedule for 1.3b3
Date Mon, 17 Nov 1997 11:03:39 GMT
Marc Slemko wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Nov 1997, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> >
> >     This is a valid point, I think - although it didn't work for 1.3b2;
> >     no-one noticed the CVS directories got included.  And if there's a
> As I said: whenever it isn't followed, it gets screwed up.  This
> policy wasn't followed for 1.3b2.  So no one had a chance to notice.
> >     problem with the tarball after announcement, well, we do what lots
> >     of other groups do: create a corrected tarball and post a message
> >     about it to the usual places.  The code is what matters, not the
> >     kit.  The content we *need* to be good, the delivery mechanism we
> >     just *want* to be good.
> Giving the tarball a day before release has found problems in
> the past before it was spread all around and we had to go through
> another announcement, etc.   Not doing that has resulted in problems
> numerous times.
> This has been gone over half a dozen times in the past months.  Each
> time, generally after something is messed up, there appeared
> to be agreement that having a day after the tarball is rolled before
> release is good.  However, no one else seems to remember that they
> agreed with the idea so I guess perhaps everyone has changed
> their mind.

FWIW, I agree. Didn't we have all this written up somewhere? The other
thing I'm sure we've been through a million times is that if something
_is_ wrong with the tarball, then we have to move to the next release
number (which solves the problem of leakage).



Ben Laurie            |Phone: +44 (181) 735 0686|Apache Group member
Freelance Consultant  |Fax:   +44 (181) 735 0689|
and Technical Director|Email: |Apache-SSL author
A.L. Digital Ltd,     |
London, England.      |"Apache: TDG"

View raw message