Re: [RESULT] Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.10 tarballs as Alpha
On 21.12.2010 19:26, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: On 12/21/2010 12:11 PM, Rainer Jung wrote: I just notified Bill about being missing from the files/ldap. This is now fixed, sorry Rainer! No prob, thanks for fixing! Regards, Rainer
Re: [RESULT] Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.10 tarballs as Alpha
On Dec 21, 2010, at 1:11 PM, Rainer Jung wrote: > On 21.12.2010 19:00, Jim Jagielski wrote: > >> As such, I'm guessing I can close the vote with at least >> 3 (binding) +1 votes. > > Isn't it 4? You, Eric, Stefan and me? I know I'm not listed in the file but > was added to the PMC in October. I just notified Bill about being missing > from the files/ldap. > Yep... I note "at least 3" because that's the bar to entry...
Re: [RESULT] Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.10 tarballs as Alpha
On 12/21/2010 12:11 PM, Rainer Jung wrote: > > I just notified Bill about being missing from the files/ldap. This is now fixed, sorry Rainer!
Re: [RESULT] Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.10 tarballs as Alpha
On 12/21/2010 12:00 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > See that's the rub: to get the untarred dirs to have that > name, I need to reroll the whole thing. I'd prefer not > having to do so at this point. I agree, if you are willing to rename the download. To fix the internal labels in the md5 and sha1 hashes, rerunning our little sign sh script in the release tools chain is probably simplest. > As such, I'm guessing I can close the vote with at least > 3 (binding) +1 votes. Yup!
Re: [RESULT] Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.10 tarballs as Alpha
On 21.12.2010 19:00, Jim Jagielski wrote: As such, I'm guessing I can close the vote with at least 3 (binding) +1 votes. Isn't it 4? You, Eric, Stefan and me? I know I'm not listed in the file but was added to the PMC in October. I just notified Bill about being missing from the files/ldap. Regards, Rainer
[RESULT] Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.10 tarballs as Alpha
On Dec 21, 2010, at 12:34 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > On 12/21/2010 10:38 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >> On Dec 21, 2010, at 10:16 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: >> >>> On 12/16/2010 6:51 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: The Apache httpd 2.3.10-alpha test tarballs are available at: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ Please vote on whether to release as 2.3.10-alpha. >>> >>> +1 to httpd-2.3.10-alpha.tar.gz/bz2 >>> (to the contents of httpd-2.3.10.tar.gz - but -1 to the current package >>> name) >> >> I've no idea how to grok this... do you want a rename of >> the archive names *as well as the resulting untarred dir* >> to be renamed or just the tar.* files? > > EDONTCARE, it's the package name I'm concerned about. So, let's refer to > 2.3.4 and 2.3.5 which were named correctly... looking at > archive.a.o/dist/httpd > > drwxr-xr-x 0 chip chip0 Nov 25 2009 httpd-2.3.4-alpha/ > -rw-r--r-- 0 chip chip0 Nov 25 2009 httpd-2.3.4-alpha/.deps > -rw-r--r-- 0 chip chip 8781 May 8 2009 httpd-2.3.4-alpha/.gdbinit > -rw-r--r-- 0 chip chip14882 Feb 14 2008 httpd-2.3.4-alpha/ABOUT_APACHE > ... See that's the rub: to get the untarred dirs to have that name, I need to reroll the whole thing. I'd prefer not having to do so at this point. As such, I'm guessing I can close the vote with at least 3 (binding) +1 votes.
