httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Gonyou, Austin" <aus...@coremetrics.com>
Subject RE: apache.org is running the 2.0.21 tarball
Date Fri, 20 Jul 2001 19:09:38 GMT
So is 2.0.22-dev from about 10am CST this morning about the same as the
tarball from lastnight..I couldnt' even get the cvs from aroun 8pm CST
lastnight to build all the way..this morning though..everything seems to be
good and happy. 

One question about the threaded MPM though..I was hearing it's not as
optimised as it could be. Is this still the concensus? If so, what stat does
it need to be in. 

-- 
Austin Gonyou
Systems Architect, CCNA
Coremetrics, Inc.
Phone: 512-796-9023
email: austin@coremetrics.com 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg Ames [mailto:gregames@remulak.net]
> Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 2:00 PM
> To: new-httpd@apache.org
> Subject: Re: apache.org is running the 2.0.21 tarball
> 
> 
> Ian Holsman wrote:
> > 
> > On 20 Jul 2001 13:18:46 -0400, Greg Ames wrote:
> > > I bounced the httpd server on daedalus over to a build 
> from the new
> > > apache 2.0.21 tarball as of Friday, 20-Jul-2001 10:12:59 
> PDT.  It looks
> > > fine, as expected.
> > what needs to be done to upgrade this to a beta?
> > are we doing the 'run 3 days on apache.org'' test?
> 
> Enough people have to vote for it being a beta, and then 
> presto! it is a
> beta (once we rename it), I believe.
> 
> As far as the '3 days' test, we've done that already if you count the
> 2_0_21-dev build, which went up Wednesday PM.  cvs has only had small
> safe changes since.  (Ryan must be busy :-)  However, I'd 
> like to see us
> run at least 24 hours on the new tarball before we do anything rash. 
> That puts us into the weekend.  Monday would be soon enough 
> for me.  But
> if other folks are really gung ho, I'd be OK with doing it 
> tomorrow (Sat
> 21 Jul) PM.
> 
> +1 on beta after 24 hours, btw.
> 
> Greg
> 

Mime
View raw message