Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.30

2018-02-28 Thread Daniel Ruggeri
All; With the release issues identified during validation, we will call this vote CLOSED with the statement that 2.4.30 is not suitable for public release. I apologise for the clerical error in not noting this sooner. On 2018/02/19 14:54:35, wrote: > Hi, all; > >Please find below the p

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.30

2018-02-27 Thread Jim Jagielski
It likely makes sense to CLOSE this vote with the result that 2.4.30 is not being released... > On Feb 19, 2018, at 9:54 AM, drugg...@primary.net wrote: > > Hi, all; >Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/ >

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.30

2018-02-22 Thread Stefan Eissing
Wow! Nice work! > Am 21.02.2018 um 21:34 schrieb Rainer Jung : > > Am 19.02.2018 um 15:54 schrieb drugg...@primary.net: >> 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 fe

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.30

2018-02-21 Thread Rainer Jung
Am 19.02.2018 um 15:54 schrieb drugg...@primary.net: 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 as 2.4.30: [ ] +1: It’s not jus

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.30

2018-02-20 Thread Rainer Jung
Am 19.02.2018 um 15:54 schrieb drugg...@primary.net: 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 as 2.4.30: [ ] +1: It’s not jus

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.30

2018-02-20 Thread William A Rowe Jr
On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 6:06 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > -1: I think with the release process hiccups and the Win issues > noted in the "Current branche 2.4.30-dev issues" thread, > we will need a 2.4.31. Additionally, there are some > backports in STATUS that could also be folded in. Very sensibl

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.30

2018-02-20 Thread Jim Jagielski
s/(#define\s+AP_SERVER_DEVBUILD_BOOLEAN\s+)\d/${1}1/g; >>>> >>>> if(/(#define\s+AP_SERVER_PATCHLEVEL_NUMBER\s+)(\d+)$/){ >>>> $new = $2 + 1; >>>> $_ = "${1}${new}\n"; >>>> } >>>> ' includ

RE: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.30

2018-02-20 Thread DRuggeri
> -Original Message- > From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com] > Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 6:10 AM > To: dev@httpd.apache.org > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.30 > > Another thing that helps is providing some heads-up > that a T&R will a

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.30

2018-02-20 Thread Jim Jagielski
/ap_release.h?view=markup#l47 >> >> It makes sense that the tag comes from a specific commit where the variable >> was flipped... Should I adjust the script and retry? >> >> -- >> Daniel Ruggeri >> >> From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com] >>

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.30

2018-02-20 Thread Jim Jagielski
-1: I think with the release process hiccups and the Win issues noted in the "Current branche 2.4.30-dev issues" thread, we will need a 2.4.31. Additionally, there are some backports in STATUS that could also be folded in. > On Feb 19, 2018, at 9:54 AM, drugg...@primary.net wrote: > > Hi, all; >

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.30

2018-02-19 Thread Jim Jagielski
gt; http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/tags/2.4.30/include/ap_release.h?view=markup#l47 > > It makes sense that the tag comes from a specific commit where the variable > was flipped... Should I adjust the script and retry? > > -- > Daniel Ruggeri > > From: Jim J

RE: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.30

2018-02-19 Thread DRuggeri
flipped... Should I adjust the script and retry? -- Daniel Ruggeri From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com] Sent: Monday, February 19, 2018 9:46 AM To: dev@httpd.apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.30 Hmmm... I'm not seeing the patch where AP_SERVER_DEVBUILD_BOOLEAN in

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.30

2018-02-19 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Feb 19, 2018, at 10:47 AM, Graham Leggett wrote: > > On 19 Feb 2018, at 5:45 PM, Jim Jagielski > wrote: > >> Hmmm... I'm not seeing the patch where AP_SERVER_DEVBUILD_BOOLEAN >> in ap_release.h is set to 0 >> >> How does your release process work? What we've alw

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.30

2018-02-19 Thread Graham Leggett
On 19 Feb 2018, at 5:45 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > Hmmm... I'm not seeing the patch where AP_SERVER_DEVBUILD_BOOLEAN > in ap_release.h is set to 0 > > How does your release process work? What we've always > done is make the req changes to the branch and then copy > from that branch to the tag. S

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.30

2018-02-19 Thread Jim Jagielski
Hmmm... I'm not seeing the patch where AP_SERVER_DEVBUILD_BOOLEAN in ap_release.h is set to 0 How does your release process work? What we've always done is make the req changes to the branch and then copy from that branch to the tag. So the tag itself must refer to a specific SVN number on the htt

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.30

2018-02-19 Thread Stefan Eissing
> Am 19.02.2018 um 15:54 schrieb : > > 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 as 2.4.30: > > [ ] +1: It’s not jus