Mailing-List: contact new-httpd-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org
From: Jim Jagielski <jim@jaguNET.com>
Message-Id: <200102051437.JAA18913@devsys.jaguNET.com>
Subject: Re: Release Strategy
To: new-httpd@apache.org
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 09:37:04 -0500 (EST)
Reply-To: jim@jaguNET.com
In-Reply-To: <20010205062540.B26044@lyra.org> from "Greg Stein" at Feb 05,
 2001 06:25:40 AM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Greg Stein wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Feb 05, 2001 at 08:49:06AM -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> > Well, one major problem is that our own internal numbering system
> > at present "leaks" into our official release version number...
> > Tags with date stamps (APACHE_2_0_0_FEB_02_00) seem like
> > good ideas, as anyone has had to deal with "now what date on
> > 4-2-STABLE is OK?" knows :)
> 
> There is no "leakage" because there is no internal vs external numbering.
> The next time we tag/roll, it should be called 2.0.1. The time after that,
> it will be 2.0.2. etc.

I was refering to the old 1.3 method, hence the word "present" 
but I agree that wasn't clear  :)

> 
> Our first 2.0 "gold" release might not be until 2.0.10. That is just how it
> goes.
> 
> [ there is an open issue for Roy to describe: what is the mechanism for
>   sequencing the numbers within CVS and/or the tag/roll process; and your
>   implicit question of where to record tag/roll symbols and dates ]
>

Agreed. Something logical and consistant.

-- 
===========================================================================
   Jim Jagielski   [|]   jim@jaguNET.com   [|]   http://www.jaguNET.com/
          "Casanova will have many weapons; To beat him you will
              have to have more than forks and flatulence."