+1... The whole idea is to find bugs and issues before
we do a formal release. We found one. It may have been
"minor" but releasing s/w with known bugs is not something
we should do. We release code when it's ready.

> On Mar 7, 2018, at 9:52 AM, Daniel Ruggeri <drugg...@primary.net> wrote:
> On 2018-03-05 10:31, Joe Orton wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 03, 2018 at 09:56:50AM -0600, Daniel Ruggeri wrote:
>>> Hi, all;
>>>   Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
>>> I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release this candidate
>>> tarball as 2.4.31:
>>> [+1] +1: It's not just good, it's good enough!
>> +1 on release for the record.  Tests and installs fine on Fedora
>> 27/x86_64.
>> ab is not the nicest pile of code, existence of bugs there are a long
>> way from showstopper material IMO, even if regressions - the tool is
>> completely ignored by a large % of our users.
>> Regards, Joe
> Hi, Joe
> I tend to agree in principle. At the same time, we've discussed here that 
> version numbers are cheap and that we generally would like to release more 
> often, so I wanted to 'walk the talk'. Thank you for testing things out. The 
> vote is not wasted since it builds confidence in the rest of the release.
> --
> Daniel Ruggeri

Reply via email to