Not sure how to grok that statement... do you mean, basically,
retagging HEAD as 2.0.34?

Ryan Bloom wrote:
> 
> Agreed, 2.0.34 would need to become HEAD to make this happen.
> 
> Ryan
> 
> ----------------------------------------------
> Ryan Bloom                  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 645 Howard St.              [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> San Francisco, CA 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Brian Pane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 9:42 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: I WANT A GA release
> > 
> > Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > 
> > >I think 2.0.34 is good enough for a GA release.  There are two major
> > >bugs that must be fixed.
> > >
> > >1)  error pages have wrong content-type.  Wrowe is working on a fix.
> > >
> > >2)  autoindex problems.  I have fixed the showstopper on my system
> with
> > >a one-line patch.  I just need to fix the HEADER/README ordering
> > >problem.  Expect a commit within the hour to fix autoindex
> completely.
> > >
> > >What else would we need to do to get a GA out of 2.0.34???????
> > >
> > 
> > We'd need to add 0.0.1 to it, at the very least. :-)
> > It wasn't until 2.0.35 that the bucket free lists
> > were added.  Without that code, multiprocessor
> > scalability isn't good enough to qualify as anything
> > other than a beta release, IMO.
> > 
> > --Brian
> > 
> > 
> 
> 


-- 
===========================================================================
   Jim Jagielski   [|]   [EMAIL PROTECTED]   [|]   http://www.jaguNET.com/
      "A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order
             will lose both and deserve neither" - T.Jefferson

Reply via email to