> On Jan 18, 2017, at 8:35 PM, Eric Covener <cove...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:12 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> > wrote: >> I'm wondering if there is anyone interested in a regression-fix-only 2.4.26 >> that >> finally proves to be a workable upgrade for all httpd users? > > It sounds reasonable to me, but I think it's a bit of an oversell -- > It's just going to be a little bit of stabilization. >
Agreed, but what did you expect? If anyone other than Bill would have proposed this, he would have complained that having such frequent releases is bad, etc... Here's the real issue, as I see it. If there have been "recent breakages" it is not due to the release process, but rather the *testing* process. That is, not enough people testing 2.4-HEAD until we actually get close to a release. The idea should be that 2.4-HEAD is ALWAYS in a releasable and "runnable" state, it being RTC after all. This is only, clearly, an attempt by Bill to commandeer the 2.4 release process, nothing more. Again, anyone is free to RM... there is no need to fabricate reasons to do so. If Bill wants to do a quick 2.4.26 with the current fixes then sure, why not. Especially if it will be "one we think is good", and we can pat Bill on the back for a job well done.
