httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Trawick <traw...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: intend to roll 2.3 alpha on Wednesday
Date Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:51:22 GMT
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 3:14 PM, William A. Rowe Jr.
<wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> Paul Querna wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 11:56 AM, William A. Rowe Jr.
>> <wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>>> Graham Leggett wrote:
>>>> Paul Querna wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I intend to roll a 2.3 alpha release on Wednesday November 11th.
>>> +1
>>>
>>>>> I will bundle APR from the 1.4.x branch. (APR people should make a
>>>>> release, but this shouldn't be a blocker for our own alpha releases).
>>> Major problem; don't do this.  You are putting 1.4.x code into a release
>>> which then ends up causing APR 1.4.0 to break its binary ABI rules.  That
>>> is just not kosher.  Some README or release notes observing that the best
>>> results can be obtained with a checkout and build of the as-yet-unreleased
>>> apr 1.4.x trunk is sufficient.
>>>
>>> If you want to 'test the bundling' - use a released apr please?
>>
>> No released APR works.
>
> It works, but isn't code-complete or bug free; what else is new?
>
>> Under our own versioning guidelines, we can and will break
>> compatibilty inside 2.3.x, so I don't see the issue created by using a
>> bundled APR.
>>
>>>>> I am almost 90% sure the release might fail due to various issues, but
>>>>> we need to start cleaning those issues out.
>>> :)
>>>
>>>> Is there a need to bundle APR at all?
>>> Agreed +1 if APR is not bundled (this is alpha, after all).
>>>
>>
>> If APR had a 1.4.0 released, it would be viable, but it doesn't.
>
> Which is altogether irrelevant.
>
>  http://apr.apache.org/versioning.html
>
> is the contract.  By shipping (installing to /usr/lib/ or /usr/local/lib/, etc)
> you have started the clock.

I'm missing something...

As long as this snapshot of APR says 1.4.0-dev, the versioning
requirements are moot.  Even the APR project will need to release
something non-GA that hopefully looks a lot like the eventual first
1.4 GA release, but without version constraints until feedback from
outside of the project is received.


> <hat role=chair>
> You also ask the HTTPD project to release "apr 1.4.0-dev", something which the
> APR project hasn't indicated they are ready for.

APR will never release -dev, right?  And as far as svn checkouts or
third-party snapshots, there's no promise that one APR 1.4.0-dev looks
like another 1.4.0-dev.

>
> There is nothing technically impossible about that, and you and the +1 vote
> crowd attest that you've reviewed the additions for soundness and all other
> incoming code concerns.  And I don't doubt this has happened, knowing the
> overlap between the lists.
>
> But do understand this is a release of APR, as the ASF and applicable law all
> differentiate that from 'work product' (e.g. svn contents).
> </hat>
>
> I just suggest that tagging 1.4.0 at the same time is very little trouble if
> that's what you 'require', and let the results of that bundle alpha swim or
> fall based on the results of a 1.4.0 release vote at apr.
>
>
>
>

Mime
View raw message