httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Hartill <>
Subject Re: The Apache Group's 1st order of business
Date Sun, 11 Jan 1998 21:02:22 GMT
On Sun, 11 Jan 1998, Ben Laurie wrote:

> > It's a good idea only if 1.3 can be put to bed quickly and something
> > comes out of the 2.0 tree for public use sooner rather than later.
> It seems to me that this will give people something to add their new
> ideas to, thus giving 1.3 a better chance of actually getting released.
> I can't see how it can delay 2.0...

A slow 2.0 will mean a long shelflife for 1.3, which means people
spending time on both trees instead of 2.0.  That's what we have with
1.2 and 1.3 now. My point is that without a plan to get 2.0 out in under
3 months (say), 1.3 will need supporting and that'll slow down 2.0 which
means 1.3 needs yet more support and so on.

2.0 could be released in 3 months if we knew its shelflife was 3 months
or less since there will be less urgency to get everything in before
a tarball is created.

The first few days/week of a brand new -dev tree are always the most
productive. Lets have more of these highly-productive phases by forcing
releases closer together.

How about 2 months of free-for-all development, 1 month "beta" testing
and if the result is no worse than the previous release, ship it.

Rob Hartill                              Internet Movie Database (Ltd)   .. a site for sore eyes.

View raw message