At 03:24 AM 5/3/2005, Paul Querna wrote: >William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: >>>This has somewhat turned into the real question, What are the show >>>stoppers for a 2.2 GA Branch? >>> >>>If you believe an issue is a show stopper for a GA Branch, please add it >>>to the STATUS File. >> >> So to amend your original proposal; on May 13; >> >> * tagging an alpha candidate >> * identifying all showstoppers to GA > >Whats wrong with updating the STATUS File today? > >AFAIK, the only other major issue is to do with apr-iconv 1.x >conflicting with apr-iconv 0.9.x. -- and as previously discussed, this >does not affect most unix platforms, since they do not use apr-iconv. I >don't have the best understanding of this issue, since it doesn't effect >me, but if no one else does it, I will add it later today to the STATUS >file. > >Are there other issues anyone believes to be show stoppers? > >Get them out on the table now. Waiting for another 'alpha' is silly. If >something is so detrimental to block making a 'beta' release, it should >be documented so everyone knows about it, and we can get more ideas on >how to fix it.
You are talking about beta showstoppers; and yes I will have iconv ready to release this week. Think we have consensus on the fix. But I'm asking about the showstoppers to GA. I want that list, to know we won't be stalled in the beta phase for long. I'll add what I know of. Bill
