Yes indeed - too true! I'll be adding a failsafe for this in the scripts
so it won't happen again.
We had a commit after the tag, so I've updated only the STATUS/CHANGES
files to correct the errant lines. I also svn rm'ed the extra tree under
the 2.4.28 tag.
I'll redo in about 30 more minutes - with the right version number fed
to the machine.
On 2019-01-17 11:51, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
One problem with scripts, they do just what they are told.
You just tagged 2.4.39 as 2.4.38.
Please revert to 2.4.38 and tag - until the tarballs are published to
it's all development in svn history.
On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 11:48 AM <drugg...@apache.org> wrote:
Date: Thu Jan 17 17:48:40 2019
New Revision: 1851557
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1851557&view=rev 
Get ready to tag httpd 2.4.38
--- httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/include/ap_release.h (original)
+++ httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/include/ap_release.h Thu Jan 17
@@ -44,7 +44,7 @@
#define AP_SERVER_MAJORVERSION_NUMBER 2
#define AP_SERVER_MINORVERSION_NUMBER 4
#define AP_SERVER_PATCHLEVEL_NUMBER 39
-#define AP_SERVER_DEVBUILD_BOOLEAN 1
+#define AP_SERVER_DEVBUILD_BOOLEAN 0
/* Synchronize the above with docs/manual/style/version.ent */