I disagree quite strongly. Take a look at the CHANGES file for 2.0.25.
We have fixed at least on seg fault in mod_mime, a memory leak in
mod_mime_magic, and two major fixes to the build system.
2.0.25 is far better than 2.0.24, and I have very little confidence in re-tagging
a week after the original tag.
The whole point of the current build system, is that we can re-tag every
week if we have to, or want to. The re-tagging is meant to be a way to
allow us to get a release out immediately after the original tag. It should not
be a way to use older trees IMO.
Ryan
On Thursday 23 August 2001 08:40, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> Lets get all the mod_include patches in then bump mod_include's tag to
> 2.0.24. That will clear us for a 2.0.24 beta should we decide that's what
> we want to do. Then tag 2.0.25 and see if it compiles everywhere and runs
> on daedalus. I have a lot of confidence that 2.0.24 will fly now but no
> confidence in 2.0.25.
>
> Bill
>
> > I have been thinking about this a lot, and I would personally prefer to
> > re-tag to 2.0.25, and go beta. There have been a LOT of improvements in
> > other sections of the code, and re-tagging after this long is just asking
> > for trouble.
> >
> > Ryan
> >
> > On Thursday 23 August 2001 08:09, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> > > With the last mod_include fix, can we bump the tag on mod_include and
> > > go beta?
> > >
> > > Bill
> >
> > --
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Covalent Technologies [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
--
______________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Covalent Technologies [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------
