Rainer Jung wrote:
Hi,
I would like to start releasing mod_jk 1.2.16 this week.
Since our last release was done from CVS and there are several updates
to the tool chain (autoconf/automake/m4/libtool), there is some risk
of breaking the release (additionally to mod_jk code bugs).
For that
Hi,
I would like to start releasing mod_jk 1.2.16 this week.
Since our last release was done from CVS and there are several updates
to the tool chain (autoconf/automake/m4/libtool), there is some risk of
breaking the release (additionally to mod_jk code bugs).
For that reason I would propose
Rainer Jung wrote:
Hi,
I would like to start releasing mod_jk 1.2.16 this week.
Any comments?
+1
--
Mladen.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 6/27/06, Rainer Jung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- take the role as RM for mod_jk 1.2.16
- tag mod_jk soon as 1.2.16-rc1
- roll a tarball and inform the dev- and user-list about availability of
a release candidate and invite to test it.
- in case of negative testing: fix, retag as rc2, reroll
+0
2006/6/27, Mladen Turk [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
David Rees wrote:
On 6/27/06, Rainer Jung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- take the role as RM for mod_jk 1.2.16
- tag mod_jk soon as 1.2.16-rc1
Why not do releases like tomcat/httpd do it? Go ahead and
rollup/release 1.2.16, then vote on the
On 6/27/06, Mladen Turk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Right, release numbers are cheap.
We are number 16 after so many years after all :)
Anyhow, just release 1.2.16, and if its broken
make 1.2.17.
I'll be sure to give it a test on Linux and IRIX once the tarball is rolled. :-)
-Dave
Hi,
+1 to Rainer's general plan, +0 to making release numbering / release
candidate approach consistent with Tomcat.
Yoav
On 6/27/06, David Rees [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6/27/06, Mladen Turk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Right, release numbers are cheap.
We are number 16 after so many years
