On 10/11/2010 12:28 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote: > On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 1:25 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. > <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote: >> On 10/11/2010 12:14 PM, Rainer Jung wrote: >>> On 11.10.2010 18:56, Jeff Trawick wrote: >>>> On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 1:29 AM, Sander Temme<san...@temme.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>>> [-1] Release apr-util 0.9.18 as GA >>>> >>>> traveling this week, but grabbed necessary items for re-roll when I >>>> saw this; will await a conclusion and re-T&R >>> >>> Another observation: previous apr(-util) releases contained .mak and .dep >>> files in the >>> win32-src zips. >>> >>> Those are not contained this time. A fix for this would probably not need a >>> new tag but a >>> reroll, but I haven't looked at the rolling scripts. >> >> Those are rolled by hand, unlike apr 1.3 and onwards. Since 0.9.19 will >> very likely be the 'last' again, I didn't see much reason to check them >> in. But I'm happy to prepare -win32-src.zip (0.9.19 apr on its way) and >> then check in the build files for unexpected future tags. > > Ouch... We can just fix release.sh to omit the Windows artifacts if > release < 1.3.
Well, if you ignore the generated .zip files this pass, as I mention I'll check those in. More problematic would be a 2.0-alpha t&r, which isn't ready (yet) for a .mak file checkin ... since it's still a moving target. The idea behind adding .mak/.dsp for win32 after the .0 release is that we have minimal noise in svn, the experience with apache 1.3.9+ was, uhm, unpleasant.
