httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Stein <>
Subject Re: cvs commit: apr/include apr.hw
Date Mon, 12 Feb 2001 22:52:22 GMT
On Mon, Feb 12, 2001 at 01:00:17PM -0500, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > This is not the model being used currently.  This is in fact the
> > > model I am asking for.  What is currently being proposed however,
> > > is no code freezes, ever.
> >
> > I am with Roy on that; code freezes have never worked well for us
> > (probably because the RM has no authority), and they have
> > been nothing but PITAs.

I'm with Roy and Ken.

> I generally agree but an exception should be made for the first (few?) Apache
> 2.0 beta release.
> We are looking to get as much feedback from our early beta releases as
> possible. If we release a beta that only compiles on, say, OS390, what have we
> accomplished? Oh, you want to make sure Apache on Linux/FreeBSD builds before
> you do the beta? Well isn't that effectively a freeze :-) ?   That is why I
> advocated a small freeze window (I recommended two days, could be a little as
> 12 hours) that is fixed and non-negotiable.

But if it doesn't compile on a lot of platforms, then it won't be called
"beta", now will it?

We snap a copy when it "feels good" and then begin testing it as a candidate
for beta. We do one of three things with it:

1) dump it as just too broken
2) release it as an alpha
3) release it as a beta

Code freezes aren't needed. Personally, I know that we're shooting for a
beta. I'm not going to be revamping the functionality of the code. Sure,
I've done some breakage the past few days, but that has all been
compile-time rather than run-time. i.e. easily solvable

There are two camps: those that require rules to enforce discipline, and
those that require trust to enforce discipline. I prefer the latter.


Greg Stein,

View raw message