httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Randy Terbush" <ra...@covalent.net>
Subject RE: Releasing 1.3.7
Date Sun, 06 Jun 1999 17:07:41 GMT
To add to this argument....

A release number is just that, "a number". Some "beta" releases are
more stable than the general release unfortunately. I don't really see
a problem with losing a number. Ultimately, it is tied back to some
release identifier.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: new-httpd-owner@apache.org
> [mailto:new-httpd-owner@apache.org]On
> Behalf Of Ben Hyde
> Sent: Friday, June 04, 1999 9:14 PM
> To: new-httpd@apache.org
> Subject: Re: Releasing 1.3.7
>
>
>
> I liked skipping the numbers, gives the story a little personality.
>
> I'm not embaressed about skipping numbers.  Being forced
> into skipping
> a number is painful procedurally only because we have to redo a mess
> of work and pull the testing fire alarm again.
>
> I've no problem with having the log say "27.7.3 wasn't released.  It
> blew up on the loading dock." gives a human quality to the
> change log
> that is sorely lacking in most comercial product change logs.
>
> I will refrain from saying more about this since my affection
> for the current practice is entirely based on how I like the
> color it gives to the narative and nothing more.
>
> Party on.
>
>  - ben
>
> "...fetid atmosphere of IT execs scurrying around carrying out the
> urgent business of the 'information age.'"
>


Mime
View raw message