On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Rolf Kulemann wrote: > On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 13:03, Jann Forrer wrote: > > On Tue, 26 Apr 2005, Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote: > >
[ ... ] > > > > This is true and we use 1.2.X just now (and not 1.2.2) but this a somehow > > unsatisfying situation because we would favor to be based on a official > > release (but 1.2.0 had some bugs which were fixed on 1.2.X). > > Sorry, but it seems you mixed 1.2.0 and 1.2.2. IMHO 1.2.2 is much more > improved than 1.2.0. AND, from 1.2.0 on we tried to release on a 2 month > basis, which is hard but seems to work, if someone feels responsible. > That is true but we never used 1.2.2 but taking 1.2.x i.e. a distinct svn version. As far as i remember, the reason for doing this is that some (for us) important bugs are fixed in 1.2.X. Please do not ask me which one ;-) > > Probably > > the use of a svn version in production has something to do with the age > > of the project. > > What do you mean? > Lenya as a new apache project is quite dynamic/fast in adding new functionality and in fixing bugs. It could therefore be necessary to use a svn version instead of a distinct release in production (which is probably not the case for a more mature project). Nevertheless in the meantime i think 1.2.X is quite stable and we hope to change to official releases soon. In any case I encourage you to stick to your relaes plan. > > Or can your imagine to download a svn version of the > > apache httpd server to use it in production? > > Never! That is exactly what I wanted to say, but the comparison between > Lenya and Apache Web Server is a bit unfair :) > agreed. Jann --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
