tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Konstantin Kolinko <knst.koli...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release build 6.0.21 (try 2)
Date Wed, 23 Dec 2009 09:33:59 GMT
2009/12/23 Mladen Turk <mturk@apache.org>:
> On 12/23/2009 02:12 AM, Rainer Jung wrote:
>>
>> release candidates (marking the files with rcX or dev or whatever) the
>> only safe thing would be to burn version number 6.0.21 and go for 6.0.22.
>>
>
> +1
>
> Let's make a proper release.

+1

>
> I'd suggest to make a release on a specific SVN revision instead tag.
> That way if voted it can easily be tagged as 6.0.22 (that revision
> instead 6.0.x trunk)
> Having that, RM can have as many candidates without re-tagging or
> creating useless tags.
>

1. Rainer states a valid point that if those files are named "6.0.22"
someone can download them from people.apache.org and claim later that
it is ours.

If those are named differently, will PGP signatures still apply?

Though it would be good to do some testing with a 6.0.0-dev build as a
RC after several months of active development, or after reconfiguring
the build environment.

2. Do we change 6.0.0-dev -> 6.0.22 in the properties file in SVN
before that revision, or in the tag only, or change it only locally?
I would prefer it to be changed in the tag.

3. While RC voting goes, should we make "6.0.(n+1)" section
in changelog.xml and add new items there, optionally moving them
into "6.0.n" section if voting fails?

I think it is OK to trash one or more version numbers. It preserves consistency.
And will we ever beat HTTPD with their *.*.63 for 2.0.x?

Best regards,
Konstantin Kolinko

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org


Mime
View raw message