httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <ad...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject Re: Tagging Apache 2.0 for beta candidate
Date Fri, 18 May 2001 21:58:12 GMT
From: "Bill Stoddard" <bill@wstoddard.com>
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2001 3:22 PM
> 
> >
> > > The tree is tagged. We are on 2.0.19-dev.  Commit away :-)
> >
> > This didn't answer the question below, did we toss proxy into the tarball?
> >
> 
> No. I rolled the tarball before I saw the request to add proxy.
> 
> > I'm -1 on releasing this tarball upon the world without rolling in the
> efforts
> > of our proxy hackers!
> 
> Cough, cough, bullshit, cough :-)  For several reasons.  First, the
> showstoppers for going for the next beta candidate were discussed over this
> week and last and they have been resolved. 

I'm not suggesting we retag the httpd-2.0 tree!!!  Just provide a single tarball
for folks to jump on this module in this beta.

> Since the tree is relatively stable now and we do not freeze development before 
> tagging a tree, now seems to be a good time to try for a beta.  
> It is not a big deal to roll the proxy
> tarball and make it available to work with 2.0.18. We can include it next
> time around.  

Why not simply tag proxy, [SAME TAG!] and add it to the tarball?  How hard
is that?

> Finally, unless I am mistaken, Chuck believes there are still
> showstopper problems with the proxy and it is not a beta candidate (the
> Akamai problems).

If chuck doesn't consider this proxy beta quality, then I pull my -1 back from
the tarball.  But if it's not an insane idea to simply add back in the proxy
to this tarball, then lets just do it.

Bill


Mime
View raw message