I assumed we would have a separate thread for the core vote, but what the heck. :)

+1 is my core vote.


Nicolas Lehuen wrote:
OK so my core group vote is +1 for this release.

It has been tested on a wide array of OSes, both threaded and forked
MPMs, Python 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4, so I guess it's okay. A threaded test
on MacOSX and Solaris would have been great but maybe the recommended
MPM on those platform is the forked one, so we don't have to worry
about those.


2006/2/7, Jim Gallacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:

I think we have enough +1's. (If someone could tally them up in a single
e-mail, that'd be great.) Should we start a core-group vote, or wait
some more? On the bash issue - I think we can leave it as is, the
affected distros will just have to maintain a patch in their build systems.

Let's vote.

Here is the test summary:

+1 Debian (sid), Apache 2.0.55-prefork, Python 2.3.5
+1 Debian (sarge), Apache 2.0.54-worker, Python 2.3.5
+1 Debian (sarge), Apache 2.0.54-prefork, Python 2.3.5
+1 Debian (testing, aka, etch), Apache 2.0.55-worker, Python 2.3.5
+1 Fedora Core 4, Linux 2.6.15, Apache 2.0.54, Python 2.4.1
+1 FreeBSD 4.9 , Apache 2.0.50 (prefork), Python 2.3.4
+1 FreeBSD 4.9 , Apache 2.0.55 (prefork), Python 2.4.2
+1 MacOSX 10.4.4 PPC, Apache-2.0.55-prefork, Python-2.4.2
+1 Slackware 10.1, Apache 2.0.55 (mpm-prefork), Python 2.4
+1 Solaris 10 Sparc, Apache-2.0.55-prefork, Python-2.4.2
+1 Ubuntu 5.10 Breezy (amd64), Apache 2.0.54-worker, Python 2.4.2
+1 Windows 2000 SP4, Apache/2.0.55 + Python/2.2.3
+1 Windows 2000 SP4, Apache/2.0.55 + ActivePython/2.3.5
+1 Windows XP SP2, Apache/2.0.55 + ActivePython/2.4.2

With configure fixed manually to deal with bash bug:
+1 Gentoo 2005.1 (amd64), Apache 2.0.55-prefork, Python 2.4.2

Plus we have the following tests from the svn revision which corresponds
to 3.2.7:
+1 trunk rev 374709 FreeBSD 6.0 Apache 2.0.55-prefork, Python 2.4.2


Reply via email to