Since I'm sure everyone is confused by now, here's the skinny: Tomcat:
* Post test build * Testing ensues ... * Call a vote on the release, with the options to call it alpha, beta, stable, or withdraw. * Announce to the world and do the usual process of distributing the bits. HTTPD: * Post alpha (build or release) * Testing ensues ... * Call a vote on the release, with the options to call it beta or general availability * Announce to the world and do the usual process of distributing the bits. The procedural difference appears to be that Tomcat has a pre-Alpha test-build and can reclassify something from "test" to "alpha". I don't see the technical difference between a "test" and an "alpha". The only difference is political: whether there's been a PMC vote. Other than that, both distributions will be available from the location, and have the same name, and from the user's perspective be the same thing. Right now, the website does not agree with what Martin and Craig are saying here. I'd like to update it one way or the other. Personally, I'd like to go with the original Apache HTTPD protocol, and if it makes people happy, just amend it to read "test build" instead of "alpha release". I also like the idea of having a formal "withdraw" option to order the distribution removed from Apache servers. (Which I'm sure the HTTPD team would do anyway.) Could people please signify which approach they would like to use for our release process, Tomcat or HTTPD? If we can get an actual majority vote on this, I'll shut up. -Ted. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
