Jeff Trawick wrote: > On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 11:29 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. > <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote: >> Jeff Trawick wrote: >>> On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 6:21 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. <wr...@rowe-clan.net> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Remember your -deps vote is to approve the release of apr 1.4.0-dev and the >>>> apr-util 1.4.0 dev, and the API versioning rules will bind from that >>>> release >>>> forwards. >>> The APR versioning rules are hopelessly broken if a tarball snapshot >>> of the 1.4.x branch before a GA release casts the API in stone. >>> >>> Surely I misunderstood you. >> Is there a README indicating that the MAJOR/MINOR version tests for this >> particular tarball are not relevant/complete? No. >> >> This is not a snapshot. It is labeled httpd-2.3.4-alpha.tar.xx release. >> You surely don't misunderstand what I said. > > Why is something with version x.y.z-dev a release and not a snapshot?
Because snapshots don't live at http://www.apache.org/dist/, those are releases. The trigger didn't occur until Paul svn mv'ed it into there. Snapshots reside at http://svn.apache.org/snapshots/ >> As for broken versioning rules, please take that to APR. >> >> Perhaps in retrospect, APR would consider an even/odds approach as httpd >> has for adding (even eliminating) interfaces during a development cycle. > > IMO the determination could be as simple as whether or not a release > in the maj.min series has yet been declared GA.
