httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org>
Subject Re: not in CVS? (was: Re: 2.0.28-beta release?)
Date Wed, 14 Nov 2001 00:14:54 GMT
On Tue, Nov 13, 2001 at 03:51:22PM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> On Tuesday 13 November 2001 03:49 pm, Greg Stein wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 13, 2001 at 04:08:09PM -0500, Greg Ames wrote:
> > >...
> > > As it turns out, the docs/conf/httpd-*.conf files also have post-tag
> > > changes.  So changing/re-tagging them in cvs would be as complex as
> > > changing the code.
> >
> > WHAT? Are you saying that I cannot produce the 2.0.28 tarball from CVS?
> >
> > That isn't right.
> 
> I would go even farther.  That is completely bogus, and if it is true, then
> 2.0.28 must be dropped.  This is why we shouldn't be making so many changes
> to a tag.  Either the tag lives or dies once it has been laid.  Small changes,
> fine.  But we added like four or five bug fixes to 2.0.28.

Woah hold on...That's not what he's saying. The way I read that was
he wanted to simply apply the httpd-std.conf changes and bump the
tag, but since there have been other fixes since the the tag that
weren't intended to be included in 2.0.28, it wouldn't be feasible.

-aaron

Mime
View raw message