Re: Notice of Intent: TR 2.0.61

2007-08-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Aug 13, 2007, at 1:08 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Jim Jagielski wrote: Just a FYI: I'm planning on doing a TR of 2.0.61 tomorrow (Aug 13); It's a retag of 2.0.60 (plus the version bump, 'natch), and a reroll with the singular exception of bundling APR 0.9.12, instead of 0.9.14.

Re: [VOTE] Apache 2.2.5, 2.0.60 1.3.38 release candidate tarballs for review

2007-08-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
The tarballs and related files for 2.0.60 have been removed from testing... Depending on the speed in which APR 0.9.15, we may go ahead with a fully combined 1.3/2.0/2.2 release (as originally planned) or release 1.3/2.2 earlier than 2.0...

Re: [VOTE] Apache 2.2.5, 2.0.60 1.3.38 release candidate tarballs for review

2007-08-13 Thread Nick Kew
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 08:02:53 -0400 Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Depending on the speed in which APR 0.9.15, we may go ahead with a fully combined 1.3/2.0/2.2 release (as originally planned) Rushed schedules lead to more bugs ... or release 1.3/2.2 earlier than 2.0...

Re: [VOTE] Apache 2.2.5, 2.0.60 1.3.38 release candidate tarballs for review

2007-08-13 Thread Andreas Kotes
Hello, view from a small commercial vendor: [ ]httpd-2.2.5 dropped into custom buildsystem for proprietary solution; passed integrety check, compilation, regression tests, application testing plus manual inspection without so much as a burp. Best regards, Andreas -- flatline IT

Re: [VOTE] Apache 2.2.5, 2.0.60 1.3.38 release candidate tarballs for review

2007-08-13 Thread Plüm , Rüdiger , VF-Group
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Nick Kew Gesendet: Montag, 13. August 2007 14:54 An: dev@httpd.apache.org Betreff: Re: [VOTE] Apache 2.2.5, 2.0.60 1.3.38 release candidate tarballs for review On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 08:02:53 -0400 Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Re: [VOTE] Apache 2.2.5, 2.0.60 1.3.38 release candidate tarballs for review

2007-08-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Aug 13, 2007, at 9:06 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote: -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Nick Kew Gesendet: Montag, 13. August 2007 14:54 An: dev@httpd.apache.org Betreff: Re: [VOTE] Apache 2.2.5, 2.0.60 1.3.38 release candidate tarballs for review On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 08:02:53

Re: [VOTE] Apache 2.2.5, 2.0.60 1.3.38 release candidate tarballs for review

2007-08-13 Thread Sander Temme
On Aug 10, 2007, at 4:49 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: Available for your testing pleasure, 3, count 'em, 3 Apache HTTP Server release candidate tarballs, located, Good PGP signatures on all. Good MD5 hashes on all, although you seem to have used md5 for 1.3 and md5sum for the others, resulting

Re: [VOTE] Apache 2.2.5, 2.0.60 1.3.38 release candidate tarballs for review

2007-08-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Aug 13, 2007, at 11:46 AM, Sander Temme wrote: On Aug 10, 2007, at 4:49 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: Available for your testing pleasure, 3, count 'em, 3 Apache HTTP Server release candidate tarballs, located, Good PGP signatures on all. Good MD5 hashes on all, although you seem to have

Re: [VOTE] Apache 2.2.5, 2.0.60 1.3.38 release candidate tarballs for review

2007-08-13 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
Jim Jagielski wrote: Also, all the way through 1.3.37 the 1.3 drop has been available in .tar.gz and .tar.Z compressed format, never in .tar.bz2. By design and on purpose, I dropped .Z in favor of bz2... I wanted similar distros available. When this came up last time, we decided to retain

Re: [VOTE] Apache 2.2.5, 2.0.60 1.3.38 release candidate tarballs for review

2007-08-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Aug 13, 2007, at 1:37 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Jim Jagielski wrote: Also, all the way through 1.3.37 the 1.3 drop has been available in .tar.gz and .tar.Z compressed format, never in .tar.bz2. By design and on purpose, I dropped .Z in favor of bz2... I wanted similar distros

Re: Roll 0.9.15 this week?

2007-08-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
Sorry for the cross post but this involves both projects: If we (APR) decide that a 0.9.15 this week makes sense, then I'm willing to hold off releasing all 3 versions of httpd until then... If 0.9.15 will instead be pushed out until whenever, then 1.3 and 2.2 will go out this week no matter

Re: [VOTE] Apache 2.2.5, 2.0.60 1.3.38 release candidate tarballs for review

2007-08-13 Thread Sander Temme
On Aug 10, 2007, at 4:49 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: [ ]httpd-2.2.5 2.2.5 Prefork is now running on issues.apache.org, running Ubuntu Dapper, and holding up nicely: http://issues.apache.org/server-status Not that we expected otherwise. (: S. -- Sander Temme [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP

Re: Notice of Intent: TR 2.0.61

2007-08-13 Thread Roy T. Fielding
On Aug 13, 2007, at 4:59 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: On Aug 13, 2007, at 1:08 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Jim Jagielski wrote: Just a FYI: I'm planning on doing a TR of 2.0.61 tomorrow (Aug 13); It's a retag of 2.0.60 (plus the version bump, 'natch), and a reroll with the singular exception

Re: Notice of Intent: TR 2.0.61

2007-08-13 Thread Sander Temme
On Aug 13, 2007, at 11:37 AM, Roy T. Fielding wrote: It is mostly the same people, regardless. Bill could tag 0.9.15 and start a release vote on APR while Jim rebuilds 2.0.x based on that tag and starts another release vote here. That way, lazy folks like me can test both at once. +1 S.

Re: Notice of Intent: TR 2.0.61

2007-08-13 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
Sander Temme wrote: On Aug 13, 2007, at 11:37 AM, Roy T. Fielding wrote: It is mostly the same people, regardless. Bill could tag 0.9.15 and start a release vote on APR while Jim rebuilds 2.0.x based on that tag and starts another release vote here. That way, lazy folks like me can test

Re: Notice of Intent: TR 2.0.61

2007-08-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Sander Temme wrote: On Aug 13, 2007, at 11:37 AM, Roy T. Fielding wrote: It is mostly the same people, regardless. Bill could tag 0.9.15 and start a release vote on APR while Jim rebuilds 2.0.x based on that tag and starts another release vote here.