Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-perl-dev-archive@perl.apache.org Received: (qmail 74904 invoked by uid 500); 4 Jun 2003 05:07:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@perl.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@perl.apache.org Received: (qmail 74891 invoked from network); 4 Jun 2003 05:07:40 -0000 Received: from vesta.ectoplasm.org (64.49.222.108) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Jun 2003 05:07:40 -0000 Received: from shou.sg.ectoplasm.org (bb-203-125-33-50.singnet.com.sg [203.125.33.50]) (using TLSv1 with cipher EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (168/168 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by vesta.ectoplasm.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06782A479D for ; Wed, 4 Jun 2003 00:07:50 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Objections to a mp-1.28 release candidate ? From: "Philippe M. Chiasson" To: dev@perl.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-353zZFiDEEdMUr18qOi0" Organization: Message-Id: <1054703266.27489.8.camel@shou.sg.ectoplasm.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-5) Date: 04 Jun 2003 13:07:46 +0800 X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N --=-353zZFiDEEdMUr18qOi0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello all, after discussions, I think it's now clear that mp1 is better off being released as-is (as close as possible), since it appears stable and the remaining issues in STATUS I want to tackle having more potential to wreak havok, were better suited for 1.29. So, having said that, I'll finish reviewing the things that changed sinte 1.27 was released. Report available here: http://www.apache.org/~gozer/mp1/1.27-dev/ Once I've been thru all that, I'll give a test spin to current CVS with as many Perls as I can find and would suggest making a release candidate for the list to test. Only 1 issue still not quite cleared yet. Stas suggested bundling Apache-Test with this release of mp1. I don't see how that could be a bad thing, since getting Apache-Test out there and adopted asap is a good thing. Any strong feelings against it? Otherwise I'd just bundle Apache-Test in the release candidate. Also, one last thing of importance I guess, is anybody seeing test failures with current CVS of any platform ? Gozer out. --=20 -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- Philippe M. Chiasson /gozer\@(cpan|ectoplasm)\.org/ 88C3A5A5 (122FF51B/C634= E37B) http://gozer.ectoplasm.org/ F9BF E0C2 480E 7680 1AE5 3631 CB32 A107 88C3= A5A5 Q: It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenio= us. perl -e'$$=3D\${gozer};{$_=3Dunpack(P7,pack(L,$$));/^JAm_pH\n$/&&print||$$+= +&&redo}' --=-353zZFiDEEdMUr18qOi0 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQA+3X6iyzKhB4jDpaURAstBAKC8nO/rtdy7mOMwgPwzgURonwwmWQCfYfcm yaq9VLV7lg0f+1thMBRen4E= =UG9c -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-353zZFiDEEdMUr18qOi0--