Re: Strange Tomcat 4.1.x release versions
I also had some questions about how releases are made a few weeks ago. Since we voted to pattern the releases after httpd, then I guess we are using this document as a guideline on how to release: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/release.html Glenn Jon Scott Stevens wrote: on 2002/12/3 11:51 AM, Craig R. McClanahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg?[EMAIL PROTECTED]. orgmsgNo=52475 Someone obviously hasn't been keeping up on TOMCAT-DEV mail :-). See the discussions and vote that took place in April 2003, where the Tomcat developers agreed to adopt the version numbering approach that Apache 2.0 (and several other projects) use. A good starting point: http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg?[EMAIL PROTECTED]. orgmsgNo=39859 Ok, I understand the version number part now. I actually read those discussions but forgot about them. Full brain. But are you also saying that the HTTPd project doesn't announce on the list in advance when a new release is going to happen? -jon -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Strange Tomcat 4.1.x release versions
On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, Jon Scott Stevens wrote: Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 11:29:54 -0800 From: Jon Scott Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Jakarta Project Management Committee List [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: tomcat-dev [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Jakarta Project Management Committee List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Strange Tomcat 4.1.x release versions The last official final release was Tomcat 4.1.12 We now have a Tomcat 4.1.16 beta. What is up with this weird release numbering? What happened to Tomcat 4.1.13? Maybe Remy got infected by Sun's marketing. I'm still curious how Sun is going to deal with releasing Java 2.0 and the confusion that is going to create with Java2. What a brain dead idea that one was. I'm also not seeing a vote taking on the list about whether or not to do a release...or at least some sort of advance warning. http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg?[EMAIL PROTECTED]msgNo=52475 I just love how this place turns into a free for all. Not. Someone obviously hasn't been keeping up on TOMCAT-DEV mail :-). See the discussions and vote that took place in April 2003, where the Tomcat developers agreed to adopt the version numbering approach that Apache 2.0 (and several other projects) use. A good starting point: http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg?[EMAIL PROTECTED]msgNo=39859 -jon Craig -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Strange Tomcat 4.1.x release versions
on 2002/12/3 11:51 AM, Craig R. McClanahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg?[EMAIL PROTECTED]. orgmsgNo=52475 Someone obviously hasn't been keeping up on TOMCAT-DEV mail :-). See the discussions and vote that took place in April 2003, where the Tomcat developers agreed to adopt the version numbering approach that Apache 2.0 (and several other projects) use. A good starting point: http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg?[EMAIL PROTECTED]. orgmsgNo=39859 Ok, I understand the version number part now. I actually read those discussions but forgot about them. Full brain. But are you also saying that the HTTPd project doesn't announce on the list in advance when a new release is going to happen? -jon -- StudioZ.tv /\ Bar/Nightclub/Entertainment 314 11th Street @ Folsom /\ San Francisco http://studioz.tv/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Strange Tomcat 4.1.x release versions
on 2002/12/3 11:57 AM, Costin Manolache [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It was voted on the list, Remy sent the proposal last week. Ok, I guess I missed that email. Sorry. -jon -- StudioZ.tv /\ Bar/Nightclub/Entertainment 314 11th Street @ Folsom /\ San Francisco http://studioz.tv/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Strange Tomcat 4.1.x release versions
On Tue, 2002-12-03 at 11:29, Jon Scott Stevens wrote: The last official final release was Tomcat 4.1.12 We now have a Tomcat 4.1.16 beta. What is up with this weird release numbering? What happened to Tomcat 4.1.13? Maybe Remy got infected by Sun's marketing. I'm still curious how Sun is going to deal with releasing Java 2.0 and the confusion that is going to create with Java2. What a brain dead idea that one was. We follow exactly the same numbering scheme as apache2. 13,14,15 had problems and followed the same path as apache2.0.13,14,15 ( i.e. they are not released as beta or stable ). Hopefully 4.1.17 will be a release quality - and we'll not get to 40s. I'm also not seeing a vote taking on the list about whether or not to do a release...or at least some sort of advance warning. It was voted on the list, Remy sent the proposal last week. Costin -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
