stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Erenkrantz <jus...@erenkrantz.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] publish stdcxx 4.1.3, take 2 (was: Re: Mac OS X and stdcxx)
Date Wed, 18 Jan 2006 20:01:42 GMT
--On January 12, 2006 3:26:52 PM -0700 Martin Sebor <sebor@roguewave.com> 
wrote:

> I created a new tarball incorporating these changes and replaced
> the old one with it. Here's the link again for convenience:
> http://people.apache.org/~sebor/stdcxx/stdcxx-incubating-4.1.3.tar.gz
> The md5sum for this file is f1bc9bd5ef0966f994a9183e7353176d.
>
> Since these were the only changes I only smoke-tested this new tarball
> with gcc 3.2.3 on Linux and gcc 4.0.2 Solaris with successul results.
> I hereby cast my +1 vote to publish this tarball :)

+1 with Solaris 10/Forte 11.

The test cases say everything 'failed', but I'm not sure that it isn't 
really a false positive.  It looks okay otherwise as far as I can tell.

> I assume everyone else's votes are still good and that we just need
> a positive vote from you, Bill, or Ben before we can ask the Incubator
> PMC for permission to publish it.

Nope.  Typically, any changes to the code contained in a release 
invalidates all previous votes.  Nice try.  =)

In the future, you should not reuse the version - therefore, this should 
really be 4.1.4.  Once, 4.1.3 is posted, it's 'gone' (regardless of whether 
it passes or not).  Therefore, a vote should be with respect to a specific 
tarball.  If that tarball changes (and a new version is pushed out), you 
need to get the minimum 3 +1s on that specific tarball.

HTH.  -- justin

Mime
View raw message