httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <>
Subject Re: Time for a 2.3/2.4 branch?
Date Sun, 04 Oct 2009 18:48:23 GMT

On Oct 4, 2009, at 2:21 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:

> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> If we are serious about trying to get a 2.4 out this year,
>> what do people say about branching off trunk at this point,
>> so we could focus on the required checks while still allowing
>> trunk to continue unabated?
> -1, until we have votes for a beta/almost GA from trunk, -or- until  
> someone
> offers a breaking patch which is targeted to something later than  
> 2.4/3.0.
> That's IMHO - vetos are irrelevant to this topic.  If you can point  
> to a
> recent commit as an example of what we shouldn't pick up in 2.4/3.0,  
> you
> could probably shift my opinion about this.  My reasoning;
> Trunk was split to allow people to make rapid progress without the  
> overhead
> of choosing the backport path and slowing down progress.  In fact,  
> progress
> on httpd is mostly at a standstill by anyone other than some  
> committed folks
> happy to work through the STATUS files.  The process had chased them  
> off,
> much as Aaron Bannert and others had argued.  On the other hand 2.2  
> is very
> dependable and stable as compared to other open source efforts.
> So forking too early isn't healthy, and forking too late (your fear)  
> also
> isn't healthy to finally accomplish a release.  Let's get to alpha  
> and then
> discuss.  (Obviously, if trunk is taken in a strange direction, it's  
> always
> possible to pull the branch later from the same rev as a particular  
> tag.)
> Does this make sense?

Yep. My only fear, as you state, is without some clear consensus that
we want to get a 2.4 out "sometime soon", we will be stuck in that
never-ending loop of polishing the turd. ;)

View raw message