Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 47168 invoked by uid 500); 30 Aug 2001 04:19:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 47156 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 04:19:08 -0000 X-Authentication-Warning: cobra.cs.Virginia.EDU: jcw5q owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 00:19:10 -0400 (EDT) From: Cliff Woolley X-X-Sender: To: , David Reid Subject: Re: 2.0.26? In-Reply-To: <999145052.25053.6.camel@c1619481-a.almda1.sfba.home.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 1586 On 29 Aug 2001, Ian Holsman wrote: > should we re-roll&tar 26 (which would include a patch to worker and > ldap_cache, some NW fixes and the apr-dbm change) > > or just re-tag the 2 files modified as 25 and re tar? It'd be nice if it built on BeOS. ::prod, prod:: :-) I vote for 26 tomorrow midday to fix these issues. I'll volunteer to RM since Ryan's already done it once in 24 hours. =-) --Cliff -------------------------------------------------------------- Cliff Woolley cliffwoolley@yahoo.com Charlottesville, VA