httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Erenkrantz <>
Subject Re: Apache 2_0_31 is now rolled
Date Sun, 03 Feb 2002 16:25:46 GMT
On Sun, Feb 03, 2002 at 11:08:54AM -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Maybe we should say that "once rolled and place in a location where
> someone (*anyone*) other than the roller can obtain the tarball".
> Obviously, as the RM, I can roll the tarball locally until my eyes
> bleed if I discover problems with what I'm doing. But once I say
> "Hey, here's the tarball" we're stuck. It's either perfect, or we bump. ;)

IMHO, that's not very good.  Ian (somewhat assisted by Aaron and
myself via IRC) had problems getting the roll right.  That was partly
due to bad docs.  Partly due to none of us had done this before (I
don't think any of us were around when the httpd-2.0 RM procedures
were discussed).  Partly due to the fact that Ian doesn't have a
daedalus account to post it.  So, I think it needs to be posted
where *developers* can get at it.

Ian was hesitant to bump to 2.0.32 because he was under the
impression that it was not permitted to bump so close to a previous
tag.  He was the RM, so it was his call.

In the past, Greg Ames has emailed the tarball (or a private link)
to people.  I think it'd be better to post it to dev@httpd.  If we
can't trust our subscribers, then perhaps we need a committers-only
list where we can privately post it so that we can ensure that we
don't have a dud tarball, but not seen by lurkers.  -- justin

View raw message