-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chuck,
On 8/20/2010 12:36 PM, Caldarale, Charles R wrote:
From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:ch...@christopherschultz.net]
Subject: Tomcat Version Numbers
What was the first version of TC 6.0 that was considered stable?
Looks like 6.0.1 was the
On 25 August 2010 15:23, Christopher Schultz
ch...@christopherschultz.netwrote:
Again, this is partly because I feel a certain sense of order which
requires releases to be X.0.0.
Why? And by release do you mean stable, production-quality releases
that we'll stake our reputations on (in which
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Peter,
On 8/25/2010 10:30 AM, Peter Crowther wrote:
On 25 August 2010 15:23, Christopher Schultz
ch...@christopherschultz.netwrote:
Again, this is partly because I feel a certain sense of order which
requires releases to be X.0.0.
Why? And
From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:ch...@christopherschultz.net]
Subject: Re: Tomcat Version Numbers
there's a 6.0.0-alpha, and then a 6.0.0, unqualified.
Does that mean that 6.0.0 was stable -- at least after
the alpha stage?
Yes. (I missed the unmarked 6.0.0 leg.)
why was 6.0.2
On 25/08/2010 16:23, Christopher Schultz wrote:
For those who never read http://tomcat.apache.org/whichversion.html, or
don't understand it (btw: that page says 7.0.0 is the current version of
the 7.0.x versions), downloading the highest version number available
(7.0.2) might not be such a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chuck,
On 8/25/2010 11:15 AM, Caldarale, Charles R wrote:
From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:ch...@christopherschultz.net]
Subject: Re: Tomcat Version Numbers
why not have a tag progression that looks like this:
6.0.0-alpha
6.0.0-beta1
From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:ch...@christopherschultz.net]
Subject: Re: Tomcat Version Numbers
Okay. Does that mean that:
[DIR] v6.0.2-alpha/ 2006-11-16 00:02-
[DIR] v6.0.2-beta/2006-11-16 00:02-
[DIR] v6.0.2/ 2006-11-16 00:02
On 25.08.2010 20:57, Christopher Schultz wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chuck,
On 8/25/2010 11:15 AM, Caldarale, Charles R wrote:
From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:ch...@christopherschultz.net]
Subject: Re: Tomcat Version Numbers
why not have a tag progression
On 20/08/2010 17:36, Caldarale, Charles R wrote:
Given that, there's no telling which 7.0 version will be the
first stable one, right?
Mark seems to be close to recommending stable, but yes, there's no telling.
Ultimately it is a community decision. The more folks that use the betas
and
From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:ch...@christopherschultz.net]
Subject: Tomcat Version Numbers
Will the TC 7.x versions numbers increase like 7.0.3, 7.0.4,
and then at some point it will be considered stable?
Yes.
That sounds like Tomcat 7.0.0 is not actually a release version,
right?
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 12:26, Christopher Schultz
ch...@christopherschultz.net wrote:
It's not that I
don't get it... it's that I have a deep-seated need for the release
version to be called 7.0.0 for some reason.
Call me cynical, but I naturally assume that a major new version will
have more
Len Popp wrote:
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 12:26, Christopher Schultz
ch...@christopherschultz.net wrote:
It's not that I
don't get it... it's that I have a deep-seated need for the release
version to be called 7.0.0 for some reason.
Call me cynical, but I naturally assume that a major new
12 matches
Mail list logo
