http://jakarta.apache.org/site/decisions.html
^^ Link to Tomcat Procedures ^^
http://jakarta.apache.org/site/guidelines.html
^^ Overall Tomcat Guidelines ^^
I updated the releases documentation to point to the Tomcat Procedures.
AFAICT the remainder of the release notes look good. Feel free to
Oh, sure, ask the tough questions after my bed-time! ;-)
I haven't had the opportunity to pour over our stuff as thoroughly as I
would like - and need to, in order to be accurate and concise. It's late
and I've absolutely got to get some rest. I start an Essbase class
tomorrow. I'm less than
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 01:23:05 -0500, Eddie Bush wrote:
Most of my concerns are in the Release Guidelines. It's ambiguous
to say any release should follow the guidelines of both tomcat and
httpd. They're decidedly different with respect to where the
emphasis is placed.
If someone can provide
My 2 cents
* Release plans are a good idea IMO and I'd prefer them being a *must*
rather than *may* - since it takes a while to get a release out, its a good
way of communicating where its at.
* I think test builds such as 1.2.5 should be on the aquiring page,
hopefully that will encourage a
Perhaps we should just use the release checklist as our guidelines. We could put a
copy under SVN and then say
The release process is described by a checklist link, which the Release Manager may
post to the wiki link and use as the basis of the Release Plan.
Which is what we've been doing
My apologies, Ted, but I've got a different release I need to be concerned
with tonght. I'm here long enough to answer some mail, eat, and relax just
a tad ... then it's back to the grind :-|
I stirred some more participation though, it looks like ... which is good
:-)
Be well!
Eddie
-
Guys, this discussion/debate is quite discouraging. I don't know how the
other committers feel, but I have no strong opinion for either. I just want
us to decide and move on.
One thing I would like to understand. Why haven't other committers brought
their opinions forward on this?
Is it:
a)
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 08:16:42 -0400, James Mitchell wrote:
I just want us to decide and move on.
Since no one was voting, I assumed that it died in commitee, and we did move on.
Ted Husted wrote:
My own feelings aside, I updated the website to coincide with what
we discussed here.
and
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 06:47:34 -0400, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't agree that it makes any practical difference whether we use Tomcat or HTTPD.
Most people won't even notice the difference. (I didn't at first.) I'd still prefer
going with HTTPD out of the box for the sake of
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 21:08:49 -0700, Martin Cooper wrote:
I'm sorry, but I don't believe your changes reflect the discussions
here at all. We did not discuss removing the development build
availability from the 'aquiring' page,
I'm vetoing that product change on the basis that we did not vote
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 00:21:29 -0500, Eddie Bush wrote:
+1 for Tomcat style release.
That's fine with me, Eddie.
Do you have a link to the Tomcat release guidelines that we can incorporate by
reference?
Or, what specific changes do we need to make to our Release Plan Checklist, Release
I don't agree that it makes any practical difference whether we use Tomcat or HTTPD.
Most people won't even notice the difference. (I didn't at first.) I'd still prefer
going with HTTPD out of the box for the sake of standardization.
My own feelings aside, I updated the website to coincide with
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
On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 07:45:56 -0400, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
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.
The options
14 matches
Mail list logo
