From: "Bill Stoddard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2001 3:22 PM
>
> >
> > > The tree is tagged. We are on 2.0.19-dev. Commit away :-)
> >
> > This didn't answer the question below, did we toss proxy into the tarball?
> >
>
> No. I rolled the tarball before I saw the request to add proxy.
>
> > I'm -1 on releasing this tarball upon the world without rolling in the
> efforts
> > of our proxy hackers!
>
> Cough, cough, bullshit, cough :-) For several reasons. First, the
> showstoppers for going for the next beta candidate were discussed over this
> week and last and they have been resolved.
I'm not suggesting we retag the httpd-2.0 tree!!! Just provide a single tarball
for folks to jump on this module in this beta.
> Since the tree is relatively stable now and we do not freeze development before
> tagging a tree, now seems to be a good time to try for a beta.
> It is not a big deal to roll the proxy
> tarball and make it available to work with 2.0.18. We can include it next
> time around.
Why not simply tag proxy, [SAME TAG!] and add it to the tarball? How hard
is that?
> Finally, unless I am mistaken, Chuck believes there are still
> showstopper problems with the proxy and it is not a beta candidate (the
> Akamai problems).
If chuck doesn't consider this proxy beta quality, then I pull my -1 back from
the tarball. But if it's not an insane idea to simply add back in the proxy
to this tarball, then lets just do it.
Bill
