httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject RE: cvs commit: httpd-2.0/build httpd_roll_release
Date Thu, 01 Aug 2002 20:58:37 GMT
At 03:32 PM 8/1/2002, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > From: William A. Rowe, Jr. [mailto:wrowe@rowe-clan.net]
> >
> > At 11:42 AM 8/1/2002, you wrote:
> > >ianh        2002/08/01 09:42:33
> > >
> > >   Modified:    build    httpd_roll_release
> > >   Log:
> > >   we need apr-iconv now
> >
> > Even if we don't build it, this is extremely good practice that the folks
> > rolling and releasing the tarball TAG the apr-iconv tree in sync with
> > the current apr and apr-util trees..
>
>I completely disagree.  The problem is that the httpd_roll_release
>script is for rolling httpd releases, not APR releases.  This change
>doesn't help people realize that they have to tag APR-iconv before they
>can release httpd.

Amazing that we tag APR at all, no?

>   I really agree with Cliff, the change to pull
>apr-iconv out of APR is annoying, and it is going to cause problems.  I
>understand that it is the "best" solution we have right now, it is still
>a bad solution.

Of course it is bad.  That's why I suggest a separate tarball for iconv.

But it doesn't matter, we need trees in-sync, so apr-iconv must be tagged
with apr's tags, from here forwards.  If you want to do that as an rtag,
that would be fine too.

Bill


Mime
View raw message