Mailing List Archive: Apache: Dev

2.3.3-alpha

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

jim at jaguNET

Oct 15, 2009, 12:54 PM

Post #1 of 8 (727 views)
Permalink

2.3.3-alpha

Planning on pushing this out to coincide w/ ACUS09... Let's assume
head of apr 1.4...

wrowe at rowe-clan

Oct 15, 2009, 4:45 PM

Post #2 of 8 (700 views)
Permalink

Re: 2.3.3-alpha [In reply to]

Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Planning on pushing this out to coincide w/ ACUS09... Let's assume
> head of apr 1.4...

-1 veto; that is not released code, and I'm not fond of the idea of a fork
of apr managed at httpd.

But if you meant, you will be moving forwards in apr to have that group accept
an apr 1.4.0 release, by all means, httpd should follow suit.

wrowe at rowe-clan

Oct 15, 2009, 4:56 PM

Post #3 of 8 (710 views)
Permalink

Re: 2.3.3-alpha [In reply to]

Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Planning on pushing this out to coincide w/ ACUS09... Let's assume
> head of apr 1.4...

You've made 'reservations' a number times in the past several years in STATUS, and
on list, that weren't realized for >1+ month afterwards.

Any time you would like to tag an alpha, please do so and be our guest, we will
all thank you for it!

And any time you are not tagging an alpha, please let someone else go ahead and
do so without waiting for your approval.

Any PMC member is welcome to tag trunk and ask for its blessing. Contrawise, any
committer can make note of a Showstopper under the STATUS section to ask for a
specific problem/veto to be corrected. [As far as I know, none exist.]

jim at jaguNET

Oct 16, 2009, 6:00 AM

Post #4 of 8 (698 views)
Permalink

Re: 2.3.3-alpha [In reply to]

On Oct 15, 2009, at 7:56 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:

> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> Planning on pushing this out to coincide w/ ACUS09... Let's assume
>> head of apr 1.4...
>
> You've made 'reservations' a number times in the past several years
> in STATUS, and
> on list, that weren't realized for >1+ month afterwards.
>
> Any time you would like to tag an alpha, please do so and be our
> guest, we will
> all thank you for it!
>
> And any time you are not tagging an alpha, please let someone else
> go ahead and
> do so without waiting for your approval.
>
> Any PMC member is welcome to tag trunk and ask for its blessing.
> Contrawise, any
> committer can make note of a Showstopper under the STATUS section to
> ask for a
> specific problem/veto to be corrected. [As far as I know, none
> exist.]
>

Yes, I know all that. But the reason I do this is to see if there
is any sort of support behind this... I've I make this proposal and
don't see any +1s, then it leaves me to believe that most people
aren't so interested in doing so, which makes me wonder why.

jim at jaguNET

Oct 16, 2009, 6:02 AM

Post #5 of 8 (696 views)
Permalink

Re: 2.3.3-alpha [In reply to]

On Oct 15, 2009, at 7:45 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:

> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> Planning on pushing this out to coincide w/ ACUS09... Let's assume
>> head of apr 1.4...
>
> -1 veto; that is not released code, and I'm not fond of the idea of
> a fork
> of apr managed at httpd.
>

Who said anything about 'apr managed at httpd'?? All I said is that
we should assume that 2.3.3-a will be released with a baseline of
apr 1.4 and using the current head as the starting point. Obviously
we aren't releasing with unreleased apr...

> But if you meant, you will be moving forwards in apr to have that
> group accept
> an apr 1.4.0 release, by all means, httpd should follow suit.
>

Bingo.

rainer.jung at kippdata

Oct 16, 2009, 6:16 AM

Post #6 of 8 (695 views)
Permalink

Re: 2.3.3-alpha [In reply to]

On 15.10.2009 21:54, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Planning on pushing this out to coincide w/ ACUS09... Let's assume
> head of apr 1.4...

+1

wrowe at rowe-clan

Oct 16, 2009, 7:22 AM

Post #7 of 8 (684 views)
Permalink

Re: 2.3.3-alpha [In reply to]

Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> Yes, I know all that. But the reason I do this is to see if there
> is any sort of support behind this... I've I make this proposal and
> don't see any +1s, then it leaves me to believe that most people
> aren't so interested in doing so, which makes me wonder why.

So speaking for myself, I am interested.

In fact, if everything builds at the moment against 1.3.x apr (irrespective
of whether or not all features are enabled) I'm likely to just tag on Sunday
or Monday, and give testers something to start chewing on, and give devs
something to complain about/improve upon. This might increase the chance of
a successful alpha/beta come ApacheCon ;-)

minfrin at sharp

Oct 16, 2009, 7:26 AM

Post #8 of 8 (701 views)
Permalink

Re: 2.3.3-alpha [In reply to]

William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:

> So speaking for myself, I am interested.

As am I.

> In fact, if everything builds at the moment against 1.3.x apr (irrespective
> of whether or not all features are enabled) I'm likely to just tag on Sunday
> or Monday, and give testers something to start chewing on, and give devs
> something to complain about/improve upon. This might increase the chance of
> a successful alpha/beta come ApacheCon ;-)

I'm happy to tag and roll a 1.4 of apr, but will only have time next
week, so don't wait for me, just get it out the door :)

Regards,
Graham
--

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads