Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 11:52:58 +0000
From: Colm MacCarthaigh <colm@stdlib.net>
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: Planning to cut a 2.0.x tarball, Sunday night
Message-ID: <20060315115258.GA12336@dochas.stdlib.net>
Reply-To: colm@stdlib.net
References: <4417CFAF.2040400@rowe-clan.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <4417CFAF.2040400@rowe-clan.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i

On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 02:26:23AM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> AFAIK - the only real showstopper against 2.0 is the next release of
> APR, which I have plans to roll this week.  Giving that group 3 days
> to consider and vote a candidate up or down, I'm looking at rolling
> the next 2.0 candidate late Sunday if all goes well.

It's in pretty good shape and has been releasable for about 6 weeks now,
save the apr-util licensing showstopper, even passing the tests since we
updated the test framework. The only outstanding I had on the TODO was
to delete the Win32 mpm_service_install patch proposal, because it's not
clear what people were voting for.

-- 
Colm MacC�rthaigh                        Public Key: colm+pgp@stdlib.net