On Tuesday, June 26, 2001, at 10:53 AM, Graham Leggett wrote:
"Victor J. Orlikowski" wrote:
This way coordination between us and the RM is completely unnecessary -
if no changes have been made to the STABLE branch between rollup
releases who cares? The RM pulls and rolls - simple.
I like this idea, until we do a CPAN type of thing.
That said, we have a ways to go to be STABLE, based on some of my testing from last night.
Then we shouldn't call it stable then, but rather LATEST.
Stable and latest are different. I think we've called those "stable" and "development" before.
That's why I propose to roll a LATEST/development every 6 hours, like the auto-cvs for httpd, and a STABLE/stable at alpha/beta releases. I'm going to tag back to the beginning of the modules-2.0 directory, so you can get whatever version of that proxy existed at the given httpd tag time.
Given that we don't use branch tags here, this will not be difficult. Note that I plan to also tag the modules-1.0 directory with 1.3.x tags based on the checkins there (only back to 1.3.19, since that's where I started the checkins).
At *all* times we must have *something* to give to the RM, who could roll an Apache tarball without warning at any time.
(says Victor, who is patrolling the bugdb as he writes this, and has turned over a segfault in the ftp proxy code, around the apr_strtok).
We know there are still bugs - it's logical to expect more as usage becomes more widespread. Doesn't matter though, we simply find the bugs and fix them. LATEST always represents the best version we can come up with so far.
Exactly.
Chuck Murcko Topsail Group http://www.topsail.org/
