On Oct 2, 2013, at 7:23 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > > On Oct 1, 2013, at 8:35 AM, Brian J. France <br...@brianfrance.com> wrote: > >> >> On Oct 1, 2013, at 8:26 AM, Jeff Trawick <traw...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 7:32 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Subj sez it all. >>>> >>>> I've never been RM for APR but am willing to do this one... >>>> >>> >>> I'm happy to take care of the RM work. >>> >>> Some things I'm interested in checking on for 1.5.x: >>> >>> * Compare 1.4.x<->1.5.x and see if anything was missed. (I'm pretty sure >>> that there are some .h fixes that skipped 1.5.x; dunno what else.) >>> * Add the cmake support. (I purposefully skipped the 1.5.x branch when >>> there was constant activity.) >>> * Put in a couple of fixes for Cygwin that somebody opened bugs for in the >>> last week or so. >>> * Test MinGW static and shared builds in conjunction with APR-util 1.5.x. >>> (Should be okay; some fixes for shared never hit the 1.4.x branch, so it >>> would be good to ensure this is finally working.) >>> * Check for anything whatsoever that could be merged from trunk and see >>> what to do, as presumably there won't be another opportunity for a while. >>> >>> It would be good for T&R to be no sooner than next Monday. >>> >>> Any other thoughts on what to look at before T&R of the first 1.5.x release? >> >> >> >> Could we back port the file rotating stuff? >> >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=905970 >> >> I am about to import 1.4 into our builds at work and would jump straight to >> 1.5 if it had the rotation stuff (would remove our own rotation patches). >> > > Certainly this needs Win32 patches, doesn't it?
Yes, it would. I guess we never worked on that side of things.
