Re: 2.1.1 tarballs posted...
On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 10:06:02PM +, Matthieu Estrade wrote: Justin Erenkrantz wrote: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ Grab the 2.1.1 tarballs while they're fresh. Please start testing these releases - they should have the intent of becoming the beginning of the 2.2.x series modulo all of the cleanup work we'll have to do after we branch. For now, 2.1.1 includes APR/APR-util 1.0.1 - we can adjust this later, if need be. 2.1.1 is currently at alpha level - if we get enough +1s (i.e. 3 or more), it can then be promoted to beta. -- justin +1 for beta One of the goals for releasing tar balls of the tree is to encourage feedback from *outside* the ASF. Before going beta, I suggest putting out a call for feedback from large implementers and deployers. I have a feeling that many lurk on this list and their experiences with the tarballs leading up to a release are very, very important. Cheers, Glenn
Re: 2.1.1 tarballs posted...
Justin Erenkrantz wrote: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ Grab the 2.1.1 tarballs while they're fresh. Please start testing these releases - they should have the intent of becoming the beginning of the 2.2.x series modulo all of the cleanup work we'll have to do after we branch. For now, 2.1.1 includes APR/APR-util 1.0.1 - we can adjust this later, if need be. 2.1.1 is currently at alpha level - if we get enough +1s (i.e. 3 or more), it can then be promoted to beta. -- justin +1 for beta Matthieu
Re: 2.1.1 tarballs posted...
--On Saturday, November 20, 2004 1:49 AM -0600 William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Back up. Nothing is a release, not even an alpha, without 3 +1's. Until it's voted as a release, even as alpha, it's simply a tarball. Nobody can declare any release without 3 +1's and it's been that way for about 7 years. No. That's not the case with unstable versions (version numbers are cheap). We operated under these rules - immediately going to alpha at RM's discretion - until we went to GA for 2.0. I swear I'm not making these rules up. I'm fine if you want to propose new rules, but releasing as alpha immediately after a tarball/tag is created *is* what we did before... -- justin
Re: 2.1.1 tarballs posted...
--On Saturday, November 20, 2004 2:35 AM -0500 Cliff Woolley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Consensus at the conference was that the branch point corresponds to the 2.1.x release upon which we declare feature freeze for the 2.2 branch. My concern with this is that if we're waiting for one small feature (say, 'group hooks'), we now have to deal with all sorts of churn in the trunk because we're waiting for that feature to land to branch. That is less than optimal, IMHO. I'd rather branch sooner than later so that we don't have to deal with stabilizing the branch with all sorts of unwanted changes later. -- justin
Re: 2.1.1 tarballs posted...
Since this is alpha level, should the server signature contain -alpha so that users don't get this confused with an actual release? Once I build binaries for NetWare, the only thing that will indicate that this is an alpha is the name of the .zip file. It would be less confusing if the binaries also showed that it is an alpha. Index: ap_release.h === --- ap_release.h(revision 105990) +++ ap_release.h(working copy) @@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ #define AP_SERVER_MAJORVERSION_NUMBER 2 #define AP_SERVER_MINORVERSION_NUMBER 1 #define AP_SERVER_PATCHLEVEL_NUMBER 1 -#define AP_SERVER_ADD_STRING +#define AP_SERVER_ADD_STRING -alpha /* keep old macros as well */ #define AP_SERVER_MAJORVERSION APR_STRINGIFY(AP_SERVER_MAJORVERSION_NUMBER) Brad [EMAIL PROTECTED] Friday, November 19, 2004 11:14:19 PM http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ Grab the 2.1.1 tarballs while they're fresh. Please start testing these releases - they should have the intent of becoming the beginning of the 2.2.x series modulo all of the cleanup work we'll have to do after we branch. For now, 2.1.1 includes APR/APR-util 1.0.1 - we can adjust this later, if need be. 2.1.1 is currently at alpha level - if we get enough +1s (i.e. 3 or more), it can then be promoted to beta. -- justin
Re: 2.1.1 tarballs posted...
The netware build is not copying the charset.conv file to the /conf directory during the make install stage. I just committed a patch for NWgnumakefile. Brad [EMAIL PROTECTED] Friday, November 19, 2004 11:14:19 PM http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ Grab the 2.1.1 tarballs while they're fresh. Please start testing these releases - they should have the intent of becoming the beginning of the 2.2.x series modulo all of the cleanup work we'll have to do after we branch. For now, 2.1.1 includes APR/APR-util 1.0.1 - we can adjust this later, if need be. 2.1.1 is currently at alpha level - if we get enough +1s (i.e. 3 or more), it can then be promoted to beta. -- justin
Re: 2.1.1 tarballs posted...
Justin Erenkrantz wrote: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ Grab the 2.1.1 tarballs while they're fresh. Please start testing these releases - they should have the intent of becoming the beginning of the 2.2.x series modulo all of the cleanup work we'll have to do after we branch. For now, 2.1.1 includes APR/APR-util 1.0.1 - we can adjust this later, if need be. 2.1.1 is currently at alpha level - if we get enough +1s (i.e. 3 or more), it can then be promoted to beta. -- justin +1 for beta. Tested on FreeBSD 5.2.1 and Linux 2.6.
Re: 2.1.1 tarballs posted...
At 12:14 AM 11/20/2004, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ Grab the 2.1.1 tarballs while they're fresh. Please start testing these releases - they should have the intent of becoming the beginning of the 2.2.x series modulo all of the cleanup work we'll have to do after we branch. For now, 2.1.1 includes APR/APR-util 1.0.1 - we can adjust this later, if need be. 2.1.1 is currently at alpha level - if we get enough +1s (i.e. 3 or more), it can then be promoted to beta. -- justin 2.1.1 is nothing (yet) 3 +1's (more +1 than -1) becomes alpha release. 3 +1's (more +1 than -1) alpha becomes beta. That beta becomes a perfect branch point for 2.2 GA. Bill
Re: 2.1.1 tarballs posted...
--On Saturday, November 20, 2004 12:53 AM -0600 William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2.1.1 is nothing (yet) 3 +1's (more +1 than -1) becomes alpha release. 3 +1's (more +1 than -1) alpha becomes beta. That beta becomes a perfect branch point for 2.2 GA. Not quite. It's alpha now. See http://httpd.apache.org/dev/release.html: Alpha indicates that the release is not meant for mainstream usage or may have serious problems that prohibits its use. When a release is initially created, it automatically becomes alpha quality. blows dust off release procedures The progression is alpha-beta-GA with it initially being alpha. Beta means that 3 people have looked at it and approved it. I know it's been a while since we've done an unstable release, but 2.1.1 is alpha. =) -- justin
Re: 2.1.1 tarballs posted...
At 01:22 AM 11/20/2004, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: --On Saturday, November 20, 2004 12:53 AM -0600 William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Alpha indicates that the release is not meant for mainstream usage or may have serious problems that prohibits its use. When a release is initially created, it automatically becomes alpha quality. blows dust off release procedures Back up. Nothing is a release, not even an alpha, without 3 +1's. Until it's voted as a release, even as alpha, it's simply a tarball. Nobody can declare any release without 3 +1's and it's been that way for about 7 years. Bill
