Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 31028 invoked by uid 500); 23 Nov 2002 19:26:28 -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 31015 invoked from network); 23 Nov 2002 19:26:28 -0000 Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 11:25:47 -0800 Subject: Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 STATUS ROADMAP Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: Aaron Bannert To: dev@httpd.apache.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <20021123191529.34903.qmail@icarus.apache.org> Message-Id: <5E5C56DC-FF19-11D6-A8B6-000393B3C494@clove.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Saturday, November 23, 2002, at 11:15 AM, wrowe@apache.org wrote: > CURRENT RELEASE NOTES: > > + * This branch is operating under R-T-C guidelines. Huh? No way. We're all adults here. If someone commits something that you are uncomfortable with, bring it up on the list. There's no reason for any ASF project to be R-T-C, IMHO. Our voting rules are sufficient enough to protect against bogus commits to stable or "maintenance" trees. > + * Backwards compatibility is expected of future Apache 2.0 > releases, > + such that no MMN major number changes will occur until 2.1. Well, we hope. :) > + * The current sandbox (cvs HEAD) operating under C-T-R > guidelines > + is version 2.1-dev. > + > + * All commits to APACHE_2_0_BRANCH must be reflected in cvs HEAD > + as well, if they apply. Logical progression is commit to > HEAD, > + get feedback (3 +1's) and then commit to APACHE_2_0_BRANCH. Yeah, well of course. Bug fixes go in both, features go in HEAD... > + > + * The 'modules/experimental' tree will evaporate soon. Anything > + in the development branch should be located under it's > eventual > + home (such as modules/cache/.) There's no reason to remove this from the 2.0 releases. They are experimental not matter way, and if someone grabs a 2.0 tarball and wants to start hacking on experimental stuff, all the better! > > RELEASE SHOWSTOPPERS: > > + * The Auth module overhaul of module names and directives need > to > + be reverted to their 2.0.43 names. The new hooks remain. -aaron