httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bill Stoddard" <b...@wstoddard.com>
Subject Re: Tagging Apache 2.0 for beta candidate
Date Fri, 18 May 2001 20:22:51 GMT


> From: "Bill Stoddard" <bill@wstoddard.com>
> Sent: Friday, May 18, 2001 11:31 AM
>
>
> > 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. We did not identify proxy as a
showstopper.  Second, I see talk on the APR dev list of some major function
shuffeling about to happen.  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.  I guarantee that the APR changes will break compiles on
some OS for at least the next week if not longer. And we can get a lot of
good beta feedback w/o proxy. Third, we have not decided the best way to
distribute the proxy. It has been discussed at length but I don;t recall a
final decision (I really have no opinions on whether the proxy is included
in the httpd-2.0 tree or not).  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.  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).

This should -by far- be the best release of Apache 2.0 to date.  If it is
beta quality, it would be foolish not to release it to the world.  My $.02

Bill



Mime
View raw message