Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of rainer.jung@kippdata.de
 designates 195.227.30.149 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <4D10DFC3.4070801@kippdata.de>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 18:11:31 +0100
From: Rainer Jung <rainer.jung@kippdata.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de;
 rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.10 tarballs as Alpha
References: <8B1281E4-34D6-4D1C-8432-16EF6D583A1B@jaguNET.com>
 <4D0FEA23.8050403@rowe-clan.net>
In-Reply-To: <4D0FEA23.8050403@rowe-clan.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On 21.12.2010 00:43, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 12/16/2010 6:51 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> The Apache httpd 2.3.10-alpha test tarballs are available at:
>>
>> 	http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
>>
>> Please vote on whether to release as 2.3.10-alpha.
>
> -1 on httpd-2.3.10-deps.  pcre is missing, although apr, apr-util and
> even expat are there.

As Jim wrote its not a regression. There was some discussion about 
whether to include PCRE in the deps tarball when we voted on 2.3.8. The 
majority was against including it and I think it was your opinion too. 
Some made the suggestion of making building against an external pcre 
easier for Netware and Windows.

See the discusion at

http://marc.info/?t=128266837200001&r=1&w=2

starting with the second mail (from G�nter).

Regards,

Rainer