httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Randy Terbush <ra...@Covalent.NET>
Subject Re: 1.2.6
Date Sun, 22 Feb 1998 16:04:37 GMT
I agree that we cannot assume that no response means that everything
is a go. I have not run 1.2.x for quite some time and don't have the
ability to give it more than a compiler and "it runs" test. Another
argument for putting our attention into 1.3 from this point on.

Jim Jagielski <> writes:
> While we are questioning how many people tested 1.3b5 before we
> rolled and released it, how many people bothered with 1.2.6?
> I notice that we didn't have any votes or anything like that
> for 1.2.6, and I'm guessing more people would be using 1.2.6
> rather than 1.3b5 in any case, so the 1.2.6 release should
> have been that much more "cautious".
> The fact is that both were released as most others have been...
> An intent of rolling was announced, a tarball was rolled, a
> request that people test it was announced with a statement
> "if all is OK we can release it on X/X" at which time it was
> done. We have, unfortunately, fallen into the habit of
> assuming that no response means that all is OK or, at the
> least, "I can't be bothered looking right now... whatever"
> As far as the 1.3b5 and 1.3b6 stuff is concerned, I _think_
> Marc says that the single UserDir stuff is now working for
> him, but that multiple is definately hosed (others concur).
> I would not mind putting a patchfile that fixes that out on
> the server and then releasing 1.3b6 "soon" in the hopes that
> we are getting close to the golden 1.3.
> -- 
> ====================================================================
>       Jim Jagielski            |       jaguNET Access Services
>           |
>             "Look at me! I'm wearing a cardboard belt!"

View raw message