Mailing-List: contact tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Tomcat Developers List" <tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Message-ID: <3F8554DB.5070209@apache.org>
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2003 14:30:19 +0200
From: Henri Gomez <hgomez@apache.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; fr;
 rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030901 Thunderbird/0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tomcat Developers List <tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [5.0.13] [4.1.28] VOTES
References: <000101c38e5d$0d65bd60$0302000a@GISDATA.ZG>
 <3F855276.60901@apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <3F855276.60901@apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Remy Maucherat a �crit :

> Mladen Turk wrote:
> 
>> One question.
>>
>> Why do we need to vote on that?
>> AFAICT the 4.1.27 was stable.
>> and the 5.0.12 was Beta.
>>
>> IMHO we should vote on Release/DoNotRelease.
>> If for example the 5.0.13 is a less quality code then 5.0.12 do not
>> release at all,
>> or vote for a Stable, if you dare ;-).
> 
> 
> I think most felt that it shouldn't be stable until the specs are 
> released (I asked already). Hence, I didn't put "Stable" as an option 
> (although I really wanted to).
> 
>> For 4.1.x, it would be strange to release 4.1.28 as Alpha, having 4.1.27
>> as stable, so again (True/False).
> 
> 
> That's a good point, but there's a major change in 4.1.x: we included 
> the j-t-c from Tomcat 5, which could cause regressions, and so it is 
> important to test it.

Mea culpa.

JTC from TC 5 hsa better support for gzip and could now use regexp
to avoid that non compatible browsers use gzip or http 1.1 ;-)

BTW, less branches, less works


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