Re: 2.0.24 ready for beta?

2001-08-24 Thread Jeff Trawick
Greg Stein [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Thu, Aug 23, 2001 at 02:53:03PM -0400, Greg Ames wrote: ... However, the bugs are getting more subtle and take longer to debug and fix. With our current process, a great deal of new code can be committed while the gnarly problem in last tarball is

Re: 2.0.24 ready for beta?

2001-08-23 Thread Cliff Woolley
On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Bill Stoddard wrote: With the last mod_include fix, can we bump the tag on mod_include and go beta? After Greg puts back in the two other fixes he accidentally reverted in his last commit and commits whatever fix it is that is running on Daedalus for the

Re: 2.0.24 ready for beta?

2001-08-23 Thread Bill Stoddard
Lets get all the mod_include patches in then bump mod_include's tag to 2.0.24. That will clear us for a 2.0.24 beta should we decide that's what we want to do. Then tag 2.0.25 and see if it compiles everywhere and runs on daedalus. I have a lot of confidence that 2.0.24 will fly now but no

Re: 2.0.24 ready for beta?

2001-08-23 Thread Ryan Bloom
I disagree quite strongly. Take a look at the CHANGES file for 2.0.25. We have fixed at least on seg fault in mod_mime, a memory leak in mod_mime_magic, and two major fixes to the build system. 2.0.25 is far better than 2.0.24, and I have very little confidence in re-tagging a week after the

Re: 2.0.24 ready for beta?

2001-08-23 Thread Bill Stoddard
What is the failure? And why was this not broken in Apache 1.3? The change seems reasonable but curious if there is a better way to fix this. Bill On Thu, 2001-08-23 at 08:09, Bill Stoddard wrote: With the last mod_include fix, can we bump the tag on mod_include and go beta? I had 1 patch

Re: 2.0.24 ready for beta?

2001-08-23 Thread Cliff Woolley
On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Bill Stoddard wrote: I don't think I am. Let's get this taken care of. :-/ Why? Most serious Apache users run Unix/Linux. And thread support under Unix/Linux is one of the main features of Apache 2.0. Obviously we need to fix Win32 but it is wrong to delay the beta

Re: 2.0.24 ready for beta?

2001-08-23 Thread Bill Stoddard
On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Bill Stoddard wrote: I don't think I am. Let's get this taken care of. :-/ Why? Most serious Apache users run Unix/Linux. And thread support under Unix/Linux is one of the main features of Apache 2.0. Obviously we need to fix Win32 but it is wrong to delay the

Re: 2.0.24 ready for beta?

2001-08-23 Thread Cliff Woolley
On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Bill Stoddard wrote: Just tried a new extract of HEAD and the server doesn't even build. Yep, same here. I'll jump right in to that. sigh Which is pretty much what I expected. At some point, we need to make binaries available so the world can take a look at what we