On Jan 7, 2009, at 5:24 AM, Issac Goldstand wrote:
*ping*
I don't actually see a vote from Steeve - just an advisory that it
seems
OK. I did vote +1, and am ready to roll (after having a baby boy +
getting the flu twice; it's been a busy month ;)) as soon as I see
a 3rd
binding vote.
Si
Issac Goldstand wrote:
Yay! That makes just a 1.5 year release cycle ;)
Me. Thought i might be slow.
--
1024D/DB9B8C1C B90B FBC3 A3A1 C71A 8E70 3F8C 75B8 8FFB DB9B 8C1C
Philip M. Gollucci (pgollu...@p6m7g8.com) c: 703.336
- Original Message
> From: Issac Goldstand
> To: Joe Schaefer
> Cc: Steve Hay ; APREQ List
> Sent: Wednesday, January 7, 2009 9:03:02 AM
> Subject: Re: [RELEASE CANDIDATE] libapreq 1.34-RC4
>
> Yay! That makes just a 1.5 year release cycle ;)
>
> I hope
48 AM
Subject: RE: [RELEASE CANDIDATE] libapreq 1.34-RC4
I didn't vote because AFAIK I don't actually have a vote. I have commit
access, but I'm not a PMC member and therefore have no vote. Is that
correct?
Everybody gets a vote ;-), but the ones that count towards
the relea
- Original Message
> From: Steve Hay
> To: Issac Goldstand
> Cc: APREQ List
> Sent: Wednesday, January 7, 2009 8:54:48 AM
> Subject: RE: [RELEASE CANDIDATE] libapreq 1.34-RC4
>
> I didn't vote because AFAIK I don't actually have a vote. I have com
Steve Hay wrote:
I didn't vote because AFAIK I don't actually have a vote. I have commit
access, but I'm not a PMC member and therefore have no vote. Is that
correct?
You're not ? mumble grumble.
--
1024D/DB9B8C1C B90B FB
t: Re: [RELEASE CANDIDATE] libapreq 1.34-RC4
*ping*
I don't actually see a vote from Steeve - just an advisory that it seems
OK. I did vote +1, and am ready to roll (after having a baby boy +
getting the flu twice; it's been a busy month ;)) as soon as I see a 3rd
binding vote.
*ping*
I don't actually see a vote from Steeve - just an advisory that it seems
OK. I did vote +1, and am ready to roll (after having a baby boy +
getting the flu twice; it's been a busy month ;)) as soon as I see a 3rd
binding vote.
Since steevehay does seem positive, I'm going to start taggin
Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
Issac Goldstand wrote:
http://people.apache.org/~issac/libapreq-1.34-RC4.tar.gz
Unit tests blow up spectacularly on solaris 2.10 but I don't think we
support that and is related to Request.so failing to load.
It does compile.
I'll get a freebsd test for some sanity
Issac Goldstand wrote:
http://people.apache.org/~issac/libapreq-1.34-RC4.tar.gz
Unit tests blow up spectacularly on solaris 2.10 but I don't think we
support that and is related to Request.so failing to load.
It does compile.
I'll get a freebsd test for some sanity in the nearish future here.
Steve Hay wrote:
Issac Goldstand wrote:
The apreq developers are planning a maintenance release of
libapreq1. This version primarily addresses an issue noted
with FireFox 2.0 truncating file uploads in SSL mode.
Additionally, the memory allocation algorithm for multipart
requests has been impr
Issac Goldstand wrote:
> The apreq developers are planning a maintenance release of
> libapreq1. This version primarily addresses an issue noted
> with FireFox 2.0 truncating file uploads in SSL mode.
>
> Additionally, the memory allocation algorithm for multipart
> requests has been improved.
>
The apreq developers are planning a maintenance release of
libapreq1. This version primarily addresses an issue noted
with FireFox 2.0 truncating file uploads in SSL mode.
Additionally, the memory allocation algorithm for multipart
requests has been improved.
Please give the tarball at
http://p
13 matches
Mail list logo
