Re: Time for httpd 2.6.x?

[Luca Toscano <to...@gmail.com>]

Il giorno mar 29 ott 2019 alle ore 18:31 Graham Leggett
<mi...@sharp.fm> ha scritto:
>
> On 29 Oct 2019, at 15:51, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com> wrote:
>
> > My only question regards workflow w/ trunk. Right now, I think we all agree that there are codepaths and features in trunk that are not as stable as we would like. Which is fine... trunk is CTR. But we do need some way to vet those changes (ie, we need to "R" all those "C"s). Some will be accepted, others not. Into what branch do those accepted go? And for the things not accepted for eventually inclusion in 2.5/2.6, do they get removed from trunk? Do they stay in trunk?
>
> As I recall from v2.4, we branched from trunk, and then we removed anything we deemed “not ready” from the branch. “not ready” had reasonably simple criteria, like “not documented yet”.
>
> > So it seems to me that we need to branch trunk into 2.5.x and "clean up" that branch (items 1-5) and leave trunk alone.
>
> +1.
>
> Let’s get a 2.5 out there, and let people bash on it.

If this was the previous way of doing things and it worked, +1 as
well. Is there anybody willing to start this process?

Luca

Re: Time for httpd 2.6.x?

[Luca Toscano <to...@gmail.com>]

Il giorno dom 3 nov 2019 alle ore 18:52 Jim Jagielski
<ji...@jagunet.com> ha scritto:
>
>
>
> On Nov 1, 2019, at 11:59 AM, Luca Toscano <to...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Il giorno mar 29 ott 2019 alle ore 18:31 Graham Leggett
> <mi...@sharp.fm> ha scritto:
>
>
> On 29 Oct 2019, at 15:51, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com> wrote:
>
> My only question regards workflow w/ trunk. Right now, I think we all agree that there are codepaths and features in trunk that are not as stable as we would like. Which is fine... trunk is CTR. But we do need some way to vet those changes (ie, we need to "R" all those "C"s). Some will be accepted, others not. Into what branch do those accepted go? And for the things not accepted for eventually inclusion in 2.5/2.6, do they get removed from trunk? Do they stay in trunk?
>
>
> As I recall from v2.4, we branched from trunk, and then we removed anything we deemed “not ready” from the branch. “not ready” had reasonably simple criteria, like “not documented yet”.
>
> So it seems to me that we need to branch trunk into 2.5.x and "clean up" that branch (items 1-5) and leave trunk alone.
>
>
> +1.
>
> Let’s get a 2.5 out there, and let people bash on it.
>
>
> If this was the previous way of doing things and it worked, +1 as
> well. Is there anybody willing to start this process?
>
>
> I don't want to start any process w/o more consensus about going forward... In particular, branching 2.5.x from trunk...

Some steps would need to be taken before creating the new branch
(basically 1. -> 5. in Yann's list), this is why I am advocating to
have one or more people with clear ideas that start the process. It
seems that overall nobody strongly disagrees with branching off trunk
(after tidying it up as necessary), but if needed we can have a quick
vote about a procedure to follow and then start the work. My 2c :)

Luca

Re: Time for httpd 2.6.x?

[Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>]

> On Nov 1, 2019, at 11:59 AM, Luca Toscano <to...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Il giorno mar 29 ott 2019 alle ore 18:31 Graham Leggett
> <minfrin@sharp.fm <ma...@sharp.fm>> ha scritto:
>> 
>> On 29 Oct 2019, at 15:51, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> My only question regards workflow w/ trunk. Right now, I think we all agree that there are codepaths and features in trunk that are not as stable as we would like. Which is fine... trunk is CTR. But we do need some way to vet those changes (ie, we need to "R" all those "C"s). Some will be accepted, others not. Into what branch do those accepted go? And for the things not accepted for eventually inclusion in 2.5/2.6, do they get removed from trunk? Do they stay in trunk?
>> 
>> As I recall from v2.4, we branched from trunk, and then we removed anything we deemed “not ready” from the branch. “not ready” had reasonably simple criteria, like “not documented yet”.
>> 
>>> So it seems to me that we need to branch trunk into 2.5.x and "clean up" that branch (items 1-5) and leave trunk alone.
>> 
>> +1.
>> 
>> Let’s get a 2.5 out there, and let people bash on it.
> 
> If this was the previous way of doing things and it worked, +1 as
> well. Is there anybody willing to start this process?

I don't want to start any process w/o more consensus about going forward... In particular, branching 2.5.x from trunk...