Garrett Rooney wrote:
> On Thursday, September 12, 2002, at 07:33 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>> Hmm. But a release doesn't have to have CN devs' changes in it.
>> Should we go
>> ahead and make a 0.14.3 release "soon", which incorporates all of this
>> recent work?
>> To that end, I'd ask the devs: do you feel that some good forward
>> motion has
>> occurred since 0.14.2? Should we make a release to incorporate that?
> personally, i think a release is in order relatively soon, if only to
> get all of philip's bug fixes out to the world so he doesn't have to
> keep saying 'i already fixed that in rev FOO'. ;-)
> on the other hand, if there's going to be another release of apr-util
> and apr soon (like the next day or so), then i would be in favor of
> waiting for that, since it would be quite nice to be able to point
> people at a real apr/apr-util release. we can't really send them to
> the 0.9.1 tarballs, since apr-util won't even configure out of the box.
I'm in favour of waiting for a stable apr and apr-util, too, and perhaps
Apache 2.0.41. Apart from that, there are 4 issues still in the mill for
Of those, 806 and 860 are P2, and it'd be sooo nice if we could at least
fix 860 (which is a long-standing problem). I don't think fixing 806
quickly is a realistic option, and we can live with 872 for a while
still. 851 is just a pain in the ouch.
Fix 860 before releaseing 0.14.3
Move 851 to 0.14.4
Move 806 and 872 to 0.14.5
Unfortunately, I won't be able to help with any of that, as I'll be away
next week. If people don't care too much about 860, then let's move it
to 0.14.4, and wait for a --presumably working -- apr(-util) 0.9.2 and
httpd 2.0.41, then roll.
Brane Čibej <brane_at_xbc.nu> http://www.xbc.nu/brane/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: email@example.com
For additional commands, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Received on Fri Sep 13 02:14:10 2002