httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bill Stoddard" <b...@wstoddard.com>
Subject Re: Final bump and roll of 2.0.36
Date Thu, 02 May 2002 15:35:26 GMT
I will be +1 for GA of 2.0.36 if it runs for 3 days w/o problems on daedalus.  I'm not
concerned with release announcements. 2.0.35 has some bugs which prevent it from being
used in production. 2.0.36 eliminates these bugs. This really should have been our first
GA release, not 2.0.35 :-)

Bill


> Greg Ames wrote:
> >
> > Sander Striker wrote:
>
> > > Tarballs are available at:
> > >   httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
> >
> > > Please test and vote accordingly ;)
> >
> > It's running on daedalus since Wednesday, 01-May-2002 18:18:16 PDT with no
> > apparent problems.  I'll check it tomorrow, then vote.
>
> [gregames@daedalus gregames]$ ls /tmp/httpd.core
> ls: /tmp/httpd.core: No such file or directory
> [gregames@daedalus gregames]$ ls /usr/local/apache/corefiles/
> [gregames@daedalus gregames]$
>
> ...and no emails reporting strange behavior on the site. +1 for beta.
>
> What about GA?
>
> pros:
>
> * The code seems more stable than 2.0.35.  No big surprise; .36 wasn't rushed.
> * worker's performance has improved noticably
> * bunches of PRs have been fixed
>
> cons:
>
> * The exact release tarball hasn't run problem free for 3 days on daedalus yet
> * It hasn't been very long since 2.0.35 was released.  I worry a little bit
> about overloading people with release announcements, plus it's a bunch of work
> for us.
>
> IMO, the pros outweigh the cons, especially if we wait a few days.
>
> Greg
>


Mime
View raw message