Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: 1.3.39?
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 16:05:18 +0200
Message-ID: 
 <3B21A253728EA247A10A692547A271530213F6DF@EITO-MBX03.internal.vodafone.com>
In-Reply-To: <5BF6A921-C7F2-4415-A791-15B5A79D4B4F@jaguNET.com>
Thread-Topic: Re: 1.3.39?
Thread-Index: AcfpfAcQKqXSIwfwRfKJrEJdt8nxbgAAF4Bw
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Pl=FCm=2C_R=FCdiger=2C_VF-Group?=
 <ruediger.pluem@vodafone.com>
To: <dev@httpd.apache.org>


> -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Jim Jagielski =20
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 28. August 2007 16:00
> An: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Betreff: 1.3.39?
>=20
>=20
> Since it's expected that there will be quite a delay
> in the next release of 1.3, assuming no security patches,
> I'm seriously considering not releasing 1.3.38 in favor
> of 1.3.39, which includes a minor patch to be sure, but
> at least it would be a release that could hold for awhile...

+1. Go Ahead.

>=20
> It would also be kind of poetic that each release skipped
> a number :)
>=20

:-)

Regards

R=FCdiger