RE: 4.2.0-rc-5 plans

2007-10-01 Thread Travis Vitek
Andrew Black wrote: The question I have is whether it makes sense to tag branches/4.2.0 as of r580483 (Martin's integration) as tags/4.2.0-rc-5, or whether it makes more sense to include the changes which were merged today as part of the 4.2.0-rc-5 tag. I would argue for the former, in part

Re: 4.2.0-rc-5 plans

2007-10-01 Thread Andrew Black
Travis Vitek wrote: Andrew Black wrote: [snip] SVN trunk at r580086 should be identical to branches/4.2.0 at r580483, assuming the merge ran correctly. I don't know if that is a safe assumption or not. I believe that 4.2.1 changes are happening on trunk but aren't being merged out to

Re: 4.2.0-rc-5 plans

2007-10-01 Thread Martin Sebor
Andrew Black wrote: Greetings all. On Friday, Martin performed a fairly major merge from trunk to branches/4.2.0. The current results of this merge from nightly testing can be found at http://people.apache.org/~ablack/4.2.0-rc5 . A handful Just a correction for those who haven't been able