On Jan 11, 2013, at 00:09 , Jan Lehnardt j...@apache.org wrote:
Hi all,
I propose to remove the following old releases from the distribution channels:
- 1.0.3
- 1.1.1
- releases/1.2.0
They are and will always be available under
http://archive.apache.org/dist/couchdb/
This is
Haha, that rhymes!
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 4:44 PM, Jan Lehnardt j...@apache.org wrote:
On Jan 11, 2013, at 00:09 , Jan Lehnardt j...@apache.org wrote:
Hi all,
I propose to remove the following old releases from the distribution
channels:
- 1.0.3
- 1.1.1
- releases/1.2.0
+1
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 11:09 PM, Jan Lehnardt j...@apache.org wrote:
Hi all,
I propose to remove the following old releases from the distribution
channels:
- 1.0.3
- 1.1.1
- releases/1.2.0
They are and will always be available under
http://archive.apache.org/dist/couchdb/
Hi all,
I propose to remove the following old releases from the distribution channels:
- 1.0.3
- 1.1.1
- releases/1.2.0
They are and will always be available under
http://archive.apache.org/dist/couchdb/
This is standard procedure, I call lazy consensus.
Best
Jan
--
+1
On 10 January 2013 23:09, Jan Lehnardt j...@apache.org wrote:
Hi all,
I propose to remove the following old releases from the distribution channels:
- 1.0.3
- 1.1.1
- releases/1.2.0
They are and will always be available under
http://archive.apache.org/dist/couchdb/
This is
All,
Now that 1.1.1 is out I'd like to remove 0.11.2 and 1.1.0 from
http://couchdb.apache.org/downloads.html
B.
On Oct 31, 2011, at 15:09 , Robert Newson wrote:
All,
Now that 1.1.1 is out I'd like to remove 0.11.2 and 1.1.0 from
http://couchdb.apache.org/downloads.html
+1
Cheers
Jan
--
+1
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 2:09 PM, Robert Newson rnew...@apache.org wrote:
All,
Now that 1.1.1 is out I'd like to remove 0.11.2 and 1.1.0 from
http://couchdb.apache.org/downloads.html
B.
All,
Now that 1.1.0 is released I want your opinions on which releases we
should archive.
For my part, I'd like Downloads to hold just 1.1.0 and 1.0.2 and
archive everything else.
B.
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 16:44, Robert Newson rnew...@apache.org wrote:
For my part, I'd like Downloads to hold just 1.1.0 and 1.0.2 and
archive everything else.
Sounds just right to me.
Cheers,
Dirkjan
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Robert Newson rnew...@apache.org wrote:
All,
Now that 1.1.0 is released I want your opinions on which releases we
should archive.
For my part, I'd like Downloads to hold just 1.1.0 and 1.0.2 and
archive everything else.
B.
Generally, +1
Does 'archiving'
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 4:50 PM, Noah Slater nsla...@apache.org wrote:
On 6 Jun 2011, at 15:47, till wrote:
Does 'archiving' break download links?
Archiving involves removing the link from downloads.html, which points to a
CGI script which automatically picks the closest mirror to your
On 6 Jun 2011, at 16:00, till wrote:
I don't care so much about the CGI script, but I'm asking from a
package maintainer perspective. So let's say I use a mirror to
download CouchDB releases, etc. -- does archiving mean they are
removed from mirrors?
Yep, that is the point of archiving
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 10:49 AM, Noah Slater nsla...@apache.org wrote:
On 6 Jun 2011, at 15:44, Robert Newson wrote:
Now that 1.1.0 is released I want your opinions on which releases we
should archive.
For my part, I'd like Downloads to hold just 1.1.0 and 1.0.2 and
archive everything
On 6 Jun 2011, at 16:32, Paul Davis wrote:
To reiterate some points. Tony Stevenson tells me the infrastructure
policy is, We expect PMcs to only keep 1 copy of each branch/major
version, anything else should be archived.
Where did he tell you this? Is it on a mailing list somewhere? My
How about we keep 1.1.0, 1.0.2 and 0.11.2 then?
When 1.0.3 is released, we'll archive 1.0.2 at least. I don't think we
should be encouraging downloads of 0.11.2, so I'd like to archive it
soon.
B.
On 6 June 2011 16:58, Noah Slater nsla...@apache.org wrote:
On 6 Jun 2011, at 16:32, Paul Davis
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 11:58 AM, Noah Slater nsla...@apache.org wrote:
On 6 Jun 2011, at 16:32, Paul Davis wrote:
To reiterate some points. Tony Stevenson tells me the infrastructure
policy is, We expect PMcs to only keep 1 copy of each branch/major
version, anything else should be archived.
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 12:02 PM, Robert Newson robert.new...@gmail.com wrote:
How about we keep 1.1.0, 1.0.2 and 0.11.2 then?
When 1.0.3 is released, we'll archive 1.0.2 at least. I don't think we
should be encouraging downloads of 0.11.2, so I'd like to archive it
soon.
B.
Yes, this is
Noah, any objections?
On 6 June 2011 17:20, Paul Davis paul.joseph.da...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 12:02 PM, Robert Newson robert.new...@gmail.com
wrote:
How about we keep 1.1.0, 1.0.2 and 0.11.2 then?
When 1.0.3 is released, we'll archive 1.0.2 at least. I don't think we
On 6 Jun 2011, at 07:44, Robert Newson wrote:
All,
Now that 1.1.0 is released I want your opinions on which releases we
should archive.
For my part, I'd like Downloads to hold just 1.1.0 and 1.0.2 and
archive everything else.
Sounds good.
Cheers
Jan
--
Agreed.
On 6 Jun 2011, at 23:12, Jan Lehnardt wrote:
On 6 Jun 2011, at 07:44, Robert Newson wrote:
All,
Now that 1.1.0 is released I want your opinions on which releases we
should archive.
For my part, I'd like Downloads to hold just 1.1.0 and 1.0.2 and
archive everything else.
I say update it to say to upgrade to 1.0.2 (or newer) and leave it
just above 1.0.2
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:54 PM, Robert Newson rnew...@apache.org wrote:
what about the 1.0.0 warning? It's part of the 1.0.1 text.
On 6 June 2011 23:38, Noah Slater nsla...@apache.org wrote:
Agreed.
On 6 Jun
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Paul Davis paul.joseph.da...@gmail.com wrote:
I would think the last release from the previous two version branches
would be enough. Ie, 0.9.2 and 0.10.1. Releasing 0.11.0 means removing
0.9.x etc etc.
I thought that too, but then you loose the full change
Hey,
As part of the release procedure, I would like to discuss archiving old
releases:
http://couchdb.apache.org/downloads.html
Please comment on what you think can be archived.
Archiving involves removing the mention on this page, and removing from the
distribution directory
On 3 Dec 2009, at 19:38, Paul Davis wrote:
I would think the last release from the previous two version branches
would be enough. Ie, 0.9.2 and 0.10.1. Releasing 0.11.0 means removing
0.9.x etc etc.
I thought that too, but then you loose the full change information from the 0.9
and 0.10
I would think the last release from the previous two version branches
would be enough. Ie, 0.9.2 and 0.10.1. Releasing 0.11.0 means removing
0.9.x etc etc.
I thought that too, but then you loose the full change information from the
0.9 and 0.10 lines.
Good point. But what about just having
26 matches
Mail list logo
