On 10/4/21 04:01, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
> I count 10 +1 votes for release and none against. I will go ahead and start
> preparing it.
>
> Thanks to everyone for putting in the time on such a short notice!
>
Looks good :
https://downloads.apache.org/httpd/Announcement2.
I count 10 +1 votes for release and none against. I will go ahead and start
preparing it.
Thanks to everyone for putting in the time on such a short notice!
Kind Regards,
Stefan
> Am 01.10.2021 um 16:40 schrieb ste...@eissing.org:
>
> Hi, all;
> Please find below the prop
+1 Windows
> Op 1 okt. 2021 om 16:41 heeft ste...@eissing.org het volgende geschreven:
> Hi, all;
> Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
>
> I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to releas
+1 debian 11
On Fri, 1 Oct 2021 at 16:41, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
>
> Hi, all;
>Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
>
> I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release
> this ca
On 2021-10-01 10:40, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
Hmm, something is off. I can see the .htaccess file in the directory listing.
I suspect a directive is missing in the config.
Cheers,
K. C.
--
regards Helmut K. C. Tessarek KeyID
On 1 Oct 2021, at 15:41, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
> I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release
> this candidate tarball httpd-2.4.50-rc1 as 2.4.50:
> [ ] +1: It's not just good, it's good enough!
+1 on CentOS7.
Regards,
Graham
—
On 02/10/2021 00:40, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
Hi, all;
Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release
this candidate tarball httpd-2.4.50-rc1 as 2.4.50:
[ ] +1: It's
On 10/2/21 14:07, Rainer Jung wrote:
> Thanks for testing Dennis. We need to get this release out quick due to
> regressions, so it wasn't the right moment to apply the OpenSSL patch.
>
> I'm confident, that Joe's OpenSSL 3.0.0 patch will be included in the
> next regu
Thanks for testing Dennis. We need to get this release out quick due to
regressions, so it wasn't the right moment to apply the OpenSSL patch.
I'm confident, that Joe's OpenSSL 3.0.0 patch will be included in the
next regular 2.4 release.
Best regards,
Rainer
Am 02.10.2021 um 13:01 schrieb
On 10/1/21 10:40, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
> Hi, all;
>Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
>
> I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release
> this candidate tarball httpd-2.
On 02/10/2021 01:12, Niklas Edmundsson wrote:
On Fri, 1 Oct 2021, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
Hi, all;
Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
Nitpick: This has probably been this way in all previous releases, but
just
On 10/1/21 10:40, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
> Hi, all;
>Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
>
> I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release
> this candidate tarball httpd-2.
+1: It's not just good, it's good enough!
Looks good for us, Cent6/7/8 Alma8
Thanks for RM’n.
Cory McIntire
PO – cPanel Security Team
Release Manager – EasyApache
cPanel / WebPros
From: ste...@eissing.org
Date: Friday, October 1, 2021 at 9:41 AM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: [VOTE
On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 10:41 AM ste...@eissing.org wrote:
>
> Hi, all;
>Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
>
> I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release
> this candidate tar
On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 4:40 PM ste...@eissing.org wrote:
>
> I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release
> this candidate tarball httpd-2.4.50-rc1 as 2.4.50:
[X] +1: It's not just good, it's good enough!
All my testing passed on my debian(s) 11 and 10.
Signatures an
On 10/1/21 16:40, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
> Hi, all;
>Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
>
> I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release
> this candidate tarball httpd-2.
On 10/1/21 11:12, Niklas Edmundsson wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Oct 2021, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
>
>> Hi, all;
>> Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
>
> Nitpick: This has probably been thi
On Fri, Oct 01, 2021 at 04:40:44PM +0200, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
> Hi, all;
>Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
>
> I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release
> this candi
On Fri, 1 Oct 2021, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
Hi, all;
Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
Nitpick: This has probably been this way in all previous releases, but
just discovered it when browsing around
Hi, all;
Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release
this candidate tarball httpd-2.4.50-rc1 as 2.4.50:
[ ] +1: It's not just good, it's good enough!
[ ] +0: Let's
...And congratulations on a job well done!
El dom, 19 sept 2021 a las 11:09, ste...@eissing.org
() escribió:
>
> Compiling the release experience.
>
> Apache httpd 2.4.49 was released on September 15/16 20201.
> There were changes to the release process and some resulting
> hi
Compiling the release experience.
Apache httpd 2.4.49 was released on September 15/16 20201.
There were changes to the release process and some resulting
hickups, but it went through.
New in the release process were:
- a switch from always incrementing version numbers to
release candidate
gt;>>>>>>> information on the website or is linking to the changelog sufficient?
>>>>>>>> We lose our pseudo-scoring and the range of affected versions. We
>>>>>>>> could bake them into our changelog-entry authoring/review.
>&g
s. We
>>>>>>> could bake them into our changelog-entry authoring/review.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I like to keep our current vulnerabilities page. On the contrary. I
>>>>>> would like to see it extended with the revision numbers that
&g
;>>> like to see it extended with the revision numbers that
>>>>> fixed the actual issue.
>>>>
>>>> +1. makes sense to me.
>>>>
>>>>> I like the vulnerabilities page we and Tomcat has very much as it eases
>>>>> the
I like to keep our current vulnerabilities page. On the contrary. I would
>>>> like to see it extended with the revision numbers that
>>>> fixed the actual issue.
>>>
>>> +1. makes sense to me.
>>>
>>>> I like the vulnerabilities page
sense to me.
>>
>>> I like the vulnerabilities page we and Tomcat has very much as it eases the
>>> search and doesn't force me to got through changelogs
>>> or other information not that quickly available.
>>
>> Given the answer by Mark on
t that quickly available.
>
> Given the answer by Mark on extensibility of the cveprocess site, we should
> make a solution based on our own pmc repository.
>
> What makes most sense to me is to copy the CVE-JSON to the pmc repro, when a
> CVE is "ready" (from our side) f
t has very much as it eases the
> search and doesn't force me to got through changelogs
> or other information not that quickly available.
Given the answer by Mark on extensibility of the cveprocess site, we should
make a solution based on our own pmc repository.
What makes most sense to
On 9/16/21 7:13 PM, Eric Covener wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 12:58 PM Mark J Cox wrote:
>>
>> Hi; at the moment the ASF customisation to the tool is tracked in my github
>> fork along with issues. There's no specific place to discuss it other than
>> secur...@apache.org. That's all
On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 12:58 PM Mark J Cox wrote:
>
> Hi; at the moment the ASF customisation to the tool is tracked in my github
> fork along with issues. There's no specific place to discuss it other than
> secur...@apache.org. That's all just because there's only me having worked
> on
/16/21 2:59 PM, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
> >>>> And thanks, Rüdiger, for noticing and the quick fixes.\o/
> >>>
> >>> And thanks to you for all the release and scripting work.
> >>
> >> I think we should request some download url feature from the
> cveproc
ote:
>>>> And thanks, Rüdiger, for noticing and the quick fixes.\o/
>>>
>>> And thanks to you for all the release and scripting work.
>>
>> I think we should request some download url feature from the cveprocess, so
>> that we can automate that part as well.
On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 9:07 AM ste...@eissing.org wrote:
>
>
>
> > Am 16.09.2021 um 15:01 schrieb Ruediger Pluem :
> >
> >
> >
> > On 9/16/21 2:59 PM, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
> >> And thanks, Rüdiger, for noticing and the quick fixes.\
> Am 16.09.2021 um 15:01 schrieb Ruediger Pluem :
>
>
>
> On 9/16/21 2:59 PM, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
>> And thanks, Rüdiger, for noticing and the quick fixes.\o/
>
> And thanks to you for all the release and scripting work.
I think we should request som
On 9/16/21 2:59 PM, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
> And thanks, Rüdiger, for noticing and the quick fixes.\o/
And thanks to you for all the release and scripting work.
Regards
Rüdiger
fails
> - the "version_affected" combobox field in the UI needs a selection other
> than default or the conversion fails
>
> Something to improve in the cveprocess and our release scripts.
>
>> Am 16.09.2021 um 14:38 schrieb Ruediger Pluem :
>>
>>
>
rove in the cveprocess and our release scripts.
> Am 16.09.2021 um 14:38 schrieb Ruediger Pluem :
>
>
>
> On 9/16/21 2:25 PM, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
>> Rüdiger, you are also probably looking at this. Who runs he shell scripts to
>> generate the mds? It seems we need to d
On 9/16/21 2:25 PM, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
> Rüdiger, you are also probably looking at this. Who runs he shell scripts to
> generate the mds? It seems we need to do that on changing the cves?
These are run on github side when you commit.
>
> Also, the converter script stumbles on CVEs
;> icing pushed a commit to branch main
>>> in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd-site.git
>>>
>>>
>>> The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/main by this push:
>>> new 51476c4 publishing release httpd-2.4.49
>>
automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.
>>>>
>>>> icing pushed a commit to branch main
>>>> in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd-site.git
>>>>
>>>>
>>>&g
tory.
>>>
>>> icing pushed a commit to branch main
>>> in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd-site.git
>>>
>>>
>>> The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/main by this push:
>>>new 51476c4 publishing relea
box.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd-site.git
>>
>>
>> The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/main by this push:
>> new 51476c4 publishing release httpd-2.4.49
>> 51476c4 is described below
>>
>> commit 51476c4d2261ea5b68951054a50c08a2
ed to refs/heads/main by this push:
> new 51476c4 publishing release httpd-2.4.49
> 51476c4 is described below
>
> commit 51476c4d2261ea5b68951054a50c08a249ea1306
> Author: Stefan Eissing
> AuthorDate: Thu Sep 16 09:58:23 2021 +0200
>
> publishing release httpd-2.4.49
>
> Am 15.09.2021 um 10:12 schrieb Dennis Clarke :
>
> On 9/15/21 04:04, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
>> According to <https://httpd.apache.org/dev/release.html>, I declare
>> this vote as PASSED with 8 +1 and a single -1.
>>
>> I will stage the release tarba
On 9/15/21 04:04, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
> According to <https://httpd.apache.org/dev/release.html>, I declare
> this vote as PASSED with 8 +1 and a single -1.
>
> I will stage the release tarballs for propagating through the mirrors
> and announce the release of 2.4.49
According to <https://httpd.apache.org/dev/release.html>, I declare
this vote as PASSED with 8 +1 and a single -1.
I will stage the release tarballs for propagating through the mirrors
and announce the release of 2.4.49 tomorrow.
Thanks for all the people who helped in making and t
All fine on windows till now.
Only waiting for a full-cycle test mod_md.
PS.
Thanks Stefan,
but I hope not a release every month or two/three, cost too much of my
cycles/free time.
On 10-9-2021 17:23, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
Hi, all;
Please find below the proposed release tarball
> Le 10/09/2021 à 17:23, ste...@eissing.org a écrit :
>> Hi, all;
>>Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
>> I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release
>> this candidate
Le 10/09/2021 à 17:23, ste...@eissing.org a écrit :
Hi, all;
Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release
this candidate tarball httpd-2.4.49-rc1 as 2.4.49:
[X] +1
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 05:23:53PM +0200, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
> Hi, all;
>Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
>
> I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release
> this candi
On 9/10/21 17:23, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
> Hi, all;
>Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
>
> I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release
> this candidate tarball httpd-2.
On 9/12/21 22:41, Dennis Clarke wrote:
> On 9/12/21 07:55, Bernard Spil wrote:
reply to self again ...
Looking in trunk I see modules/ssl/ssl_private.h :
struct SSLSrvConfigRec {
SSLModConfigRec *mc;
ssl_enabled_tenabled;
const char *vhost_id;
const unsigned char
s trouble in paradise." due to
the fact that the 2.4.49-rc1 tarball will not work out of the box with
the production release of OpenSSL 3.0.0. There needs to be a fix here
such that it "just works"(tm) with the latest OpenSSL.
> On Sun, Sep 12, 2021 at 7:02 AM Dennis Clarke wrote:
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 5:24 PM ste...@eissing.org wrote:
>
> I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release
> this candidate tarball httpd-2.4.49-rc1 as 2.4.49:
[X] +1: It's not just good, it's good enough!
All my testing passed on debian(s) 11 and 10.
Thanks aga
Sep 10, 2021 at 05:23:53PM +0200 schrieb ste...@eissing.org:
> Hi, all;
>Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
>
> I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release
> this candidate tarball htt
+1, thanks again for RM'ing and the release improvements.
AIX/xlc/ppc64 100% on httpd-framework albeit not the greatest module
coverage on my new system
Files=139, Tests=7027, 231 wallclock secs ( 1.82 usr 0.43 sys + 45.99
cusr 20.74 csys = 68.98 CPU)
Result: PASS
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 11:24
On 11/09/2021 01:23, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
Hi, all;
Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release
this candidate tarball httpd-2.4.49-rc1 as 2.4.49:
[ ] +1: It's
On Sun, Sep 12, 2021 at 2:07 PM Eric Covener wrote:
>
> On Sun, Sep 12, 2021 at 3:02 AM Dennis Clarke wrote:
> >
> > On 9/12/21 02:36, Dennis Clarke wrote:
> > > On 9/10/21 11:23, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
> > >> Hi, all;
> > >>Please fin
On Sun, Sep 12, 2021 at 3:02 AM Dennis Clarke wrote:
>
> On 9/12/21 02:36, Dennis Clarke wrote:
> > On 9/10/21 11:23, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
> >> Hi, all;
> >>Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
> >> https://dist.apache.org/
AH00489: Apache/2.4.49 (FreeBSD) OpenSSL/3.0.0 configured
-- resuming normal operations
On Sun, Sep 12, 2021 at 7:02 AM Dennis Clarke wrote:
>
> On 9/12/21 02:36, Dennis Clarke wrote:
> > On 9/10/21 11:23, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
> >> Hi, all;
> >>Please f
On 9/12/21 02:36, Dennis Clarke wrote:
> On 9/10/21 11:23, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
>> Hi, all;
>>Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
>>
>> I would like to call a VOTE
On 9/10/21 11:23, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
> Hi, all;
>Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
>
> I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release
> this candidate tarball httpd-2.
Hi, all;
Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release
this candidate tarball httpd-2.4.49-rc1 as 2.4.49:
[ ] +1: It's not just good, it's good enough!
[ ] +0: Let's
1981
>
> Seems, a new APR release would be nice for the poor macOS people...
On its way, AIUI.
Cheers;
Yann.
e.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64753
Switch the configure.in to the one in branches/1.7.x, buildconf again and now
it compiles
Seems, a new APR release would be nice for the poor macOS people...
>
>>
>> I have the insane plan to actually test the tars before putting them out
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 4:18 PM ste...@eissing.org wrote:
>
> APR experts: I build the -deps tar with apr 1.7.0 / apr-util 1.6.1. Those are
> looked up at the site as the latest, just like the old scripts did.
> However, that will not configure on my macOS. The branches/1.7.x which I
> normally
APR experts: I build the -deps tar with apr 1.7.0 / apr-util 1.6.1. Those are
looked up at the site as the latest, just like the old scripts did.
However, that will not configure on my macOS. The branches/1.7.x which I
normally use does.
./include/apr.h:561:2: error: Can not determine the
On 9/10/21 12:07 PM, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
>
> So far, I hear that people think we should make a 2.4.49 based
> on the current 2.4.x.
>
> I will do some IRL errands and things and come back to this
> in the afternoon. If this still stands then, I'll create a
> 2.4.49-rc1 and put that
gt;
>>>> On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 03:23:13PM -0700, Gregg Smith wrote:
>>>>> Since OpenSSL 3.0.0 GA came out yesterday (Californuts time) I think it
>>>>> would be nice to have r1891138 backported for those wishing to try it out.
>>>>>
OpenSSL 3.0.0 GA came out yesterday (Californuts time) I think it
>>>> would be nice to have r1891138 backported for those wishing to try it out.
>>>> What you say?
>>>
>>> I'd say it's better to try to get a successful release out, then try to
>>&g
ink it
> >> would be nice to have r1891138 backported for those wishing to try it out.
> >> What you say?
> >
> > I'd say it's better to try to get a successful release out, then try to
> > get new features in the stable branch. (In fact, I'd be quite happy if
Indeed it kind of sounds too early to go with OpenSSL 3 yet to consider for
a stable release of apache. (Too fresh out of the oven?)
El vie., 10 sept. 2021 9:42, ste...@eissing.org
escribió:
>
>
> > Am 10.09.2021 um 09:02 schrieb Joe Orton :
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 09,
What you say?
>
> I'd say it's better to try to get a successful release out, then try to
> get new features in the stable branch. (In fact, I'd be quite happy if
> we had 2.5.x/2.6 released and stopped trying new features in 2.4 :)
>
> That revision is not sufficient, I ha
On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 03:23:13PM -0700, Gregg Smith wrote:
> Since OpenSSL 3.0.0 GA came out yesterday (Californuts time) I think it
> would be nice to have r1891138 backported for those wishing to try it out.
> What you say?
I'd say it's better to try to get a successful release out,
On Thu, 9 Sept 2021 at 22:23, Gregg Smith wrote:
>
> Since OpenSSL 3.0.0 GA came out yesterday (Californuts time) I think it
> would be nice to have r1891138 backported for those wishing to try it
> out. What you say?
+1 for the backport
On 9/9/21 18:23, Gregg Smith wrote:
> Since OpenSSL 3.0.0 GA came out yesterday (Californuts time) I think it
> would be nice to have r1891138 backported for those wishing to try it
> out. What you say?
I have been doing some testing with the OpenSSL beta releases for quite
some time now. However
Since OpenSSL 3.0.0 GA came out yesterday (Californuts time) I think it
would be nice to have r1891138 backported for those wishing to try it
out. What you say?
Cheers,
Gregg
On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 4:11 PM ste...@eissing.org wrote:
>
> FYI: from the script side, I am ready to roll the first candidate.
> - We have one security issue in a not quite complete state
> - There are 2 possible back ports hanging in STATUS
>
> We can see tomorrow how comfy we are and either I
FYI: from the script side, I am ready to roll the first candidate.
- We have one security issue in a not quite complete state
- There are 2 possible back ports hanging in STATUS
We can see tomorrow how comfy we are and either I roll right away or
we target Monday/Tuesday, I suppose.
cheers,
Awesome, great work Stefan, thanks a lot!
On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 4:22 PM ste...@eissing.org wrote:
>
> After some learning experience (*cough*) I committed a new
> version of the scripts, now in $DEV_TOOLS/release that go
> so far as staging local changes to all repositories after
&g
After some learning experience (*cough*) I committed a new
version of the scripts, now in $DEV_TOOLS/release that go
so far as staging local changes to all repositories after
a successful vote.
I will test some more tomorrow and add the announce mailing
part. The real test will then come when
Does someone have an idea what needs to change regarding our website and
release updates?
Since I have my hands dirty already, now would be a good time to have me do
it...
- Stefan
The v2 release scripts in ^/httpd/dev-tools do now work for me
to create the tarballs, checksums and signatures for a release
vote and push them to dist.apache.org.
The steps after a vote need some more work. I will do that in the
coming days. However, since we can do a vote now
to review the
last changes to these release branches.
But I'd be happier co-RM'ing this with a newer committer/PMC
participant who wants to learn the ropes. Any volunteers?
Other thoughts or observations?
On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 3:09 AM Rainer Jung wrote:
>
> Hi there,
>
> any chance w
On 9/2/21 3:06 PM, Eric Covener wrote:
> Since you are going through this I wanted to mention:
>
> I think the public doc we have should mention everything that's done
> during ther release, even the security stuff that is somewhat private.
> The ASF-wide security policy is
Since you are going through this I wanted to mention:
I think the public doc we have should mention everything that's done
during ther release, even the security stuff that is somewhat private.
The ASF-wide security policy is already public
(https://www.apache.org/security/committers.html
On Thu, Sep 2, 2021 at 8:21 AM ste...@eissing.org wrote:
>
> OK, small hickup. The build shell for the manuals wants a JDK 1.8 or 11...
> uhm...I need a time machine, or we can change the check there.
>
> Since I am not experienced in our manual stuff, can someone knowledgable
> check this?
If
org:
>
>
>
>> Am 01.09.2021 um 13:15 schrieb Eric Covener :
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 6:08 AM ste...@eissing.org wrote:
>>>
>>> Having a look at the release scripts and how they work.
>>>
>>> I think we can use SVN and its branches/t
> Am 01.09.2021 um 13:15 schrieb Eric Covener :
>
> On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 6:08 AM ste...@eissing.org wrote:
>>
>> Having a look at the release scripts and how they work.
>>
>> I think we can use SVN and its branches/tags in a bit smarter way
>>
On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 6:08 AM ste...@eissing.org wrote:
>
> Having a look at the release scripts and how they work.
>
> I think we can use SVN and its branches/tags in a bit smarter way
> and make things easier. As Christophe mentioned, he would like a
> "--dry-run"
>check PGP/GPG key in httpd-dist/KEYS
This reminds me, when I looked the other day you did not yet have an
entry in KEYS (svn co https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/httpd
httpd-dist)
On 9/1/21 12:08 PM, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
> Having a look at the release scripts and how they work.
>
> I think we can use SVN and its branches/tags in a bit smarter way
> and make things easier. As Christophe mentioned, he would like a
> "--dry-run" option, becau
Having a look at the release scripts and how they work.
I think we can use SVN and its branches/tags in a bit smarter way
and make things easier. As Christophe mentioned, he would like a
"--dry-run" option, because when things do not run smoothly to the
end, you have not only a local
.org>
>>> <mailto:ste...@eissing.org> wrote:
>>>> In what state is our release handling? Given someone holding my hand,
>>>> could I do it? Or is it better to look someone over the shoulder while he
>>>> does it?
>>> If there is an over
On 8/31/21 8:57 PM, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
>
> Le 31/08/2021 à 20:25, Eric Covener a écrit :
>>
>> Should we think about reverting the recent mod_unique_id changes? It
>> seems like that was noticed pretty quickly but I think the current
>> problem is still not well understood. Meanwhile
Le 31/08/2021 à 20:25, Eric Covener a écrit :
Should we think about reverting the recent mod_unique_id changes? It
seems like that was noticed pretty quickly but I think the current
problem is still not well understood. Meanwhile the original problem
on the old codebase wasn't widely
On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 12:41 PM Yann Ylavic wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 1:54 PM Eric Covener wrote:
> >
> > Also: Anyone who has a showstopper to delay a release (even if not yet
> > proposed) please add it to 2.4.x STATUS so we can get things in order.
&
> Am 30.08.2021 um 22:53 schrieb Christophe JAILLET
> :
>
>
> Le 30/08/2021 à 13:53, Eric Covener a écrit :
>> On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 7:36 AM ste...@eissing.org
>> wrote:
>>> In what state is our release handling? Given someone holding my hand, could
On 8/30/2021 3:53 PM, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
>
> Le 30/08/2021 à 13:53, Eric Covener a écrit :
>> On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 7:36 AM ste...@eissing.org
>> wrote:
>>> In what state is our release handling? Given someone holding my
>>> hand, could I do it?
301 - 400 of 4444 matches
Mail list logo
