Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-new-httpd-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 82316 invoked by uid 500); 6 Jan 2001 00:39:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact new-httpd-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list new-httpd@apache.org Received: (qmail 82305 invoked from network); 6 Jan 2001 00:39:25 -0000 Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 16:43:01 -0800 (PST) From: rbb@covalent.net X-Sender: rbb@koj To: new-httpd@apache.org Subject: Re: Canonical Names in 2.0 In-Reply-To: <014a01c07770$a6745c20$011aa8c0@godzilla> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Rating: h31.sny.collab.net 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Fri, 5 Jan 2001, David Reid wrote: > I've said it before (and I'm saying it again) but I think we should wait > until Bill's done on this stuff before we go beta. His stuff will mean a > fair few changes and we want to be sure it all works as expected before we > go beta. > > If Bill's got a timeline we could always set a date to aim at now that we > seem to be resolving the other issues. This should give us time to hammer > it and run it on apache for a period to make sure we're happy. > > Just my 2p again... I agree, it would be really nice to wait. However, we have been waiting for a long time to release a beta. I do believe we are close to being able to run Apache on apache.org. If OtherBill gets the canonical name stuff done, let's put it in, if not, it can wait till beta 2. At some point, we have to say we have enough in this beta, and the rest of the fixes will wait for beta 2. Ryan _______________________________________________________________________________ Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org 406 29th St. San Francisco, CA 94131 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------