Ryan Bloom wrote: > > > I think we all agree that once a tarball > > is "public" (meaning that non-developers have the *potential* of > > grabbing it) if there's something wrong with it, we have to bump > > before we reroll.
If it makes it to /www.apache.org/dist/httpd/, then I agree. If the only place it resides is intended strictly for developers, then I think that's too conservative, especially if it's just a roll problem. > I would vote in favor of having a developer only place to grab it then. +1 > The mail to ask people to test should go to the list of httpd > committers. That excludes people like Madhu who isn't a committer but has given us valuable feedback on our roll procedures. My vote would be something like Justin suggested, with a few tweaks: put the preliminary tarballs in a developer only directory, put appropriate disclaimers in a HEADER file (so you see them in an autoindex listing), and ask people to test on the dev@httpd list. Once we know the fate of the tarball, remove it from this dir so people don't get used to finding stuff there. We probably wouldn't want any links on our site to this directory either. If in spite of these precautions, any lurkers grab the preliminary tarballs and have problems: * they have been warned, * if it's a code problem, we are going to patch, re-tag, and re-roll soon anyway, * if it's a roll problem, doing ./buildconf will often fix (we could mention that in the HEADER), * I would think most responsible lurkers would de-cloak and speak up if they are the first to see a problem. If not, how much should I care about their problem? Greg
