> On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 12:20:17PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On 21 May 2001, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> >
> > > "Bill Stoddard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > > > I think we have a good shot at a beta candidate. I plan to tag the
tree
> > > > early this afternoon (ET) unless I hear objections.
> > >
> > > I think it is fine for that tarball to go out as a beta as long as we
> > > make a patch available for srclib/apr-util/Makefile.in to use with RH
> > > 7.1 (and whatever other platforms may be affected).
> >
> > Whoah. We have a tarball that we know doesn't build on RH 7.1 at the
very
> > least. That is not a beta tarball. That would be an alpha tarball.
> > Release it as an alpha, at least that's my vote.
>
> Agreed. +1 on alpha. -0 on beta.
>
> (sounds like mod_dav_fs wasn't configuring properly either)
>
Any objections to making binaries available, or is that the definition of a
beta ? :-) I want to get the server out in the world for folks to pound on.
Bill
