You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Paul Querna <ch...@force-elite.com> on 2005/08/18 07:43:01 UTC
Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Just a heads up, I am planning to RM and tag 2.1.7 (and re-branch from
trunk the 2.2.x branch) on Friday or Saturday this week. I intend to
include APR and APR-Util 1.2.1 with this release.
As long as 2.1.7 seems good, I would like to do a vote on making it a Beta.
Thanks,
-Paul
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by Colm MacCarthaigh <co...@stdlib.net>.
On Sun, Aug 21, 2005 at 11:15:43AM -0400, Joshua Slive wrote:
> > http://people.heanet.ie/~colmmacc/manual/misc/cachingguide.html.en
> >
> >Which is about half done. Comments & contributions welcome.
>
> Looks good. A few comments:
>
> See docs like env.html, sections.html, and logs.html for an example
> structure. We usually have "Related Directives" and "Related Modules"
> sections at the top. And we use "Examples" instead of "Case studies".
No problem.
> You can go ahead and commit it whenever you want. But I'd put it in
> the root directory of the manual rather than "misc". That directory
> (and, in general, every directory called "misc") just winds up being a
> dumping ground for things with no good place. This doc belongs beside
> logs.html, urlmapping.html, sections.html, etc, in the main directory.
I'll commit it once an account is set up, most of the TBD's on that page
are just awaiting a copy and paste from my notes.
Many thanks for the comments.
--
Colm MacCárthaigh Public Key: colm+pgp@stdlib.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by Colm MacCarthaigh <co...@stdlib.net>.
On Sun, Aug 21, 2005 at 11:15:43AM -0400, Joshua Slive wrote:
> > http://people.heanet.ie/~colmmacc/manual/misc/cachingguide.html.en
> >
> >Which is about half done. Comments & contributions welcome.
>
> Looks good. A few comments:
>
> See docs like env.html, sections.html, and logs.html for an example
> structure. We usually have "Related Directives" and "Related Modules"
> sections at the top. And we use "Examples" instead of "Case studies".
No problem.
> You can go ahead and commit it whenever you want. But I'd put it in
> the root directory of the manual rather than "misc". That directory
> (and, in general, every directory called "misc") just winds up being a
> dumping ground for things with no good place. This doc belongs beside
> logs.html, urlmapping.html, sections.html, etc, in the main directory.
I'll commit it once an account is set up, most of the TBD's on that page
are just awaiting a copy and paste from my notes.
Many thanks for the comments.
--
Colm MacCárthaigh Public Key: colm+pgp@stdlib.net
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by Joshua Slive <jo...@slive.ca>.
On Fri, 19 Aug 2005, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
>
> In this spirit, a major new feature of httpd-2.2 will be reliably
> working Caching, but the documentation on Caching is a bit tough on
> users right now. I'm currently working on this;
>
> http://people.heanet.ie/~colmmacc/manual/misc/cachingguide.html.en
>
> Which is about half done. Comments & contributions welcome.
Looks good. A few comments:
See docs like env.html, sections.html, and logs.html for an example
structure. We usually have "Related Directives" and "Related Modules"
sections at the top. And we use "Examples" instead of "Case studies".
You can go ahead and commit it whenever you want. But I'd put it in the
root directory of the manual rather than "misc". That directory (and, in
general, every directory called "misc") just winds up being a dumping
ground for things with no good place. This doc belongs beside logs.html,
urlmapping.html, sections.html, etc, in the main directory.
Joshua.
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by Joshua Slive <jo...@slive.ca>.
On Fri, 19 Aug 2005, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
>
> In this spirit, a major new feature of httpd-2.2 will be reliably
> working Caching, but the documentation on Caching is a bit tough on
> users right now. I'm currently working on this;
>
> http://people.heanet.ie/~colmmacc/manual/misc/cachingguide.html.en
>
> Which is about half done. Comments & contributions welcome.
Looks good. A few comments:
See docs like env.html, sections.html, and logs.html for an example
structure. We usually have "Related Directives" and "Related Modules"
sections at the top. And we use "Examples" instead of "Case studies".
You can go ahead and commit it whenever you want. But I'd put it in the
root directory of the manual rather than "misc". That directory (and, in
general, every directory called "misc") just winds up being a dumping
ground for things with no good place. This doc belongs beside logs.html,
urlmapping.html, sections.html, etc, in the main directory.
Joshua.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by Colm MacCarthaigh <co...@stdlib.net>.
In this spirit, a major new feature of httpd-2.2 will be reliably
working Caching, but the documentation on Caching is a bit tough on
users right now. I'm currently working on this;
http://people.heanet.ie/~colmmacc/manual/misc/cachingguide.html.en
Which is about half done. Comments & contributions welcome.
On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 08:30:32PM -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> docs@httpd'ers...
>
> As Paul mentions below, on Friday (probably 1 a.m. ;-) he will
> tag 2.1.7. This is just a reminder to our most excellent doco
> team that, once ack'ed - this becomes 2.1 beta, and then...
> (drum roll please...) 2.2 GA(!)
>
> So if you had changes to catch up with 2.1 that perhaps have
> been sitting in your local checkouts, now is an excellent time
> to commit the docs improvements.
>
> Each release, we state "v x.x is the best available version
> of Apache", and certainly the docs@ team has proven this!
> When 2.2 final (not beta, not alpha) drops, we certainly all
> want this to be true not only of the code, but also of the
> accompanying documentation! And I trust you will make it so.
>
> Yours,
>
> Bill
>
> p.s. it's been a while - have I told you all lately that
> you rock?!?
>
> :)
>
>
> At 12:43 AM 8/18/2005, Paul Querna wrote:
> >Just a heads up, I am planning to RM and tag 2.1.7 (and re-branch from
> >trunk the 2.2.x branch) on Friday or Saturday this week. I intend to
> >include APR and APR-Util 1.2.1 with this release.
> >
> >As long as 2.1.7 seems good, I would like to do a vote on making it a Beta.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >
> >-Paul
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
>
>
--
Colm MacCárthaigh Public Key: colm+pgp@stdlib.net
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
At 08:30 PM 8/18/2005, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>docs@httpd'ers...
>
>As Paul mentions below, on Friday (probably 1 a.m. ;-) he will
>tag 2.1.7. This is just a reminder to our most excellent doco
>team that, once ack'ed - this becomes 2.1 beta, and then...
>(drum roll please...) 2.2 GA(!)
Oh, if it sounded like -this- exact release would become GA,
I didn't necessarily mean to imply that. But, it's getting
much closer.
Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by Colm MacCarthaigh <co...@stdlib.net>.
In this spirit, a major new feature of httpd-2.2 will be reliably
working Caching, but the documentation on Caching is a bit tough on
users right now. I'm currently working on this;
http://people.heanet.ie/~colmmacc/manual/misc/cachingguide.html.en
Which is about half done. Comments & contributions welcome.
On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 08:30:32PM -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> docs@httpd'ers...
>
> As Paul mentions below, on Friday (probably 1 a.m. ;-) he will
> tag 2.1.7. This is just a reminder to our most excellent doco
> team that, once ack'ed - this becomes 2.1 beta, and then...
> (drum roll please...) 2.2 GA(!)
>
> So if you had changes to catch up with 2.1 that perhaps have
> been sitting in your local checkouts, now is an excellent time
> to commit the docs improvements.
>
> Each release, we state "v x.x is the best available version
> of Apache", and certainly the docs@ team has proven this!
> When 2.2 final (not beta, not alpha) drops, we certainly all
> want this to be true not only of the code, but also of the
> accompanying documentation! And I trust you will make it so.
>
> Yours,
>
> Bill
>
> p.s. it's been a while - have I told you all lately that
> you rock?!?
>
> :)
>
>
> At 12:43 AM 8/18/2005, Paul Querna wrote:
> >Just a heads up, I am planning to RM and tag 2.1.7 (and re-branch from
> >trunk the 2.2.x branch) on Friday or Saturday this week. I intend to
> >include APR and APR-Util 1.2.1 with this release.
> >
> >As long as 2.1.7 seems good, I would like to do a vote on making it a Beta.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >
> >-Paul
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
>
>
--
Colm MacCárthaigh Public Key: colm+pgp@stdlib.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
docs@httpd'ers...
As Paul mentions below, on Friday (probably 1 a.m. ;-) he will
tag 2.1.7. This is just a reminder to our most excellent doco
team that, once ack'ed - this becomes 2.1 beta, and then...
(drum roll please...) 2.2 GA(!)
So if you had changes to catch up with 2.1 that perhaps have
been sitting in your local checkouts, now is an excellent time
to commit the docs improvements.
Each release, we state "v x.x is the best available version
of Apache", and certainly the docs@ team has proven this!
When 2.2 final (not beta, not alpha) drops, we certainly all
want this to be true not only of the code, but also of the
accompanying documentation! And I trust you will make it so.
Yours,
Bill
p.s. it's been a while - have I told you all lately that
you rock?!?
:)
At 12:43 AM 8/18/2005, Paul Querna wrote:
>Just a heads up, I am planning to RM and tag 2.1.7 (and re-branch from
>trunk the 2.2.x branch) on Friday or Saturday this week. I intend to
>include APR and APR-Util 1.2.1 with this release.
>
>As long as 2.1.7 seems good, I would like to do a vote on making it a Beta.
>
>Thanks,
>
>-Paul
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by Mladen Turk <mt...@apache.org>.
Paul Querna wrote:
> Just a heads up, I am planning to RM and tag 2.1.7 (and re-branch from
> trunk the 2.2.x branch) on Friday or Saturday this week. I intend to
> include APR and APR-Util 1.2.1 with this release.
>
> As long as 2.1.7 seems good, I would like to do a vote on making it a Beta.
>
OK. I have fixed the mod_setenvif build for WIN32.
But...
mod_proxy_balancer is core dumping (accessing NULL address).
I'll try to fix that by today evening, but not sure
if I'll succeed.
I'm on the vacation starting tomorrow, so someone will need to
check that before release.
There has been lots of commits for various methods, etc...
Hope the Jim will know better.
<Proxy balancer://cluster>
BalancerMember http://localhost:8081
# BalancerMember ajp://localhost:7009
# BalancerMember ajp://localhost:8009
# BalancerMember ajp://localhost:9009
</Proxy>
ProxyPass /servlets-examples balancer://cluster/servlets-examples
Is core dumping, and the debug shows only the disassembly option.
So, -1 for the tag unless resolved.
Regards,
Mladen.
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by Paul Querna <ch...@force-elite.com>.
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> At 12:43 AM 8/18/2005, Paul Querna wrote:
>
>>Just a heads up, I am planning to RM and tag 2.1.7 (and re-branch from
>>trunk the 2.2.x branch) on Friday or Saturday this week. I intend to
>>include APR and APR-Util 1.2.1 with this release.
>
>
> Note you can't tag the recent commit to mod_dir, there
> is a veto on the floor.
Yes, I disagree to the said veto, and I hope to have an alternative
available before I do this. (If not, I agree completely and will omit
that change from the branch, or revert trunk.)
>>As long as 2.1.7 seems good, I would like to do a vote on making it a Beta.
>
>
> Our procedure (I forget you are relatively speaking a bit
> new to this role :-) is to let this ride three days on
> our own infrastructure, eating our own dogfood, so to speak.
Sure, if someone in Infrastructure is willing and has the time to set it
up. I don't have the karma to do it myself.
> If that doesn't keel over I'll support the vote to go beta.
> This is not quite GA, IMHO, but getting quite close.
>
> FYI you can't trash branches willy nilly, which is why I had
> warned you not to branch. You must now backport each change
> you wish to introduce to 2.2 from trunk/. Not R-T-C, of
> course, but C-T-R. Sorry, you dug the hole, now climb out.
>
Actually, after consulting Karl Fogel(svn-developer) on IRC, he says
that re-creating the branch will not cause a problem with people's
working copies, as long as both branches have the same origin, which
they will.
-Paul
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
At 12:43 AM 8/18/2005, Paul Querna wrote:
>Just a heads up, I am planning to RM and tag 2.1.7 (and re-branch from
>trunk the 2.2.x branch) on Friday or Saturday this week. I intend to
>include APR and APR-Util 1.2.1 with this release.
Note you can't tag the recent commit to mod_dir, there
is a veto on the floor.
>As long as 2.1.7 seems good, I would like to do a vote on making it a Beta.
Our procedure (I forget you are relatively speaking a bit
new to this role :-) is to let this ride three days on
our own infrastructure, eating our own dogfood, so to speak.
If that doesn't keel over I'll support the vote to go beta.
This is not quite GA, IMHO, but getting quite close.
FYI you can't trash branches willy nilly, which is why I had
warned you not to branch. You must now backport each change
you wish to introduce to 2.2 from trunk/. Not R-T-C, of
course, but C-T-R. Sorry, you dug the hole, now climb out.
Trashing a branch means that one of your co-committers with
a checkout is going to be very, very borked when they svn up.
Just don't do it.
Bill
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by Joe Orton <jo...@redhat.com>.
On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 09:50:24AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> On Aug 19, 2005, at 9:32 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> >What platform... seems to work fine under Linux and OS X.
> >
> >This is what add_lbmethods does...
> >
> >Did you do a complete make diskclean and then rebuild?
> >
>
> I've confirmed that without that hack, the server works fine
> and as expected... I'm not sure, but I would almost
> bet that it was due not all required *.o's being
> rebuilt, and the hook in mod_proxy not being called
> when you tested.
>
> Can others confirm one way or another?
I volunteer you to add a test case to httpd-test to verify the stuff you
didn't break isn't broken, and I'll volunteer myself to run it ;)
joe
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by Mladen Turk <mt...@apache.org>.
Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>
> I've confirmed that without that hack, the server works fine
> and as expected... I'm not sure, but I would almost
> bet that it was due not all required *.o's being
> rebuilt, and the hook in mod_proxy not being called
> when you tested.
>
> Can others confirm one way or another?
>
The problem is that there is no default lbmethod.
If you set the "lbmethod" to the balancer config then it'll work.
Without it will core dump, because it will be NULL.
With my patch it will use the byrequest as default lbmethod,
so it's probably OK, and not an ugly hack after all :)
Regards,
Mladen.
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
On Aug 19, 2005, at 9:32 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> What platform... seems to work fine under Linux and OS X.
>
> This is what add_lbmethods does...
>
> Did you do a complete make diskclean and then rebuild?
>
I've confirmed that without that hack, the server works fine
and as expected... I'm not sure, but I would almost
bet that it was due not all required *.o's being
rebuilt, and the hook in mod_proxy not being called
when you tested.
Can others confirm one way or another?
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by Mladen Turk <mt...@apache.org>.
Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> On Aug 19, 2005, at 12:45 PM, Mladen Turk wrote:
>
>> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>
>>> This is weird... Can you Email me your config file? No need
>>> to send it to the list.
>>>
>>
>> Any lbmethod is failing and the conf->lbmethods->nelts is 0.
>> The add_lbmethods hook is never called.
>>
>
> Off the top of my head I can't figure out why it's not being called.
> Is there some Windows specific build file that must be updated
> to reflect the new hook?
>
No there is not.
The hook gets called in post_config, but not in create_config.
Of course if you move it to the post_config the config will
not work, because the array is still uninitialized.
Think it's a hook related stuff and .dll loading.
Regards,
Mladen.
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
On Aug 19, 2005, at 12:45 PM, Mladen Turk wrote:
> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>> This is weird... Can you Email me your config file? No need
>> to send it to the list.
>>
>
> Any lbmethod is failing and the conf->lbmethods->nelts is 0.
> The add_lbmethods hook is never called.
>
Off the top of my head I can't figure out why it's not being called.
Is there some Windows specific build file that must be updated
to reflect the new hook?
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by Mladen Turk <mt...@apache.org>.
Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>
> This is weird... Can you Email me your config file? No need
> to send it to the list.
>
Any lbmethod is failing and the conf->lbmethods->nelts is 0.
The add_lbmethods hook is never called.
<Proxy balancer://cluster>
BalancerMember http://localhost:8080
ProxySet lbmethod="byrequests"
ProxySet lbmethod="bytraffic"
</Proxy>
Regards,
Mladen.
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
On Aug 19, 2005, at 11:56 AM, Mladen Turk wrote:
> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>> Is it a scope issue because find_best_bytraffic is defined
>> as static...? Hmmm. I need to look into that.
>>
>>
>
> Perhaps the problem is because on windows the config is
> run twice.
It is on Unix as well.
> Also seems that the hook is never run, or is run only once:
> For example:
> ProxySet lbmethod="byrequests"
> returns:
> Syntax error on line 496 of C:/W/apache/headd/conf/httpd.conf:
> ProxySet unknown lbmethod lbmethod balancer://cluster
>
This is weird... Can you Email me your config file? No need
to send it to the list.
Thanks!
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by Mladen Turk <mt...@apache.org>.
Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>
> Is it a scope issue because find_best_bytraffic is defined
> as static...? Hmmm. I need to look into that.
>
Perhaps the problem is because on windows the config is
run twice.
Also seems that the hook is never run, or is run only once:
For example:
ProxySet lbmethod="byrequests"
returns:
Syntax error on line 496 of C:/W/apache/headd/conf/httpd.conf:
ProxySet unknown lbmethod lbmethod balancer://cluster
I have added:
static proxy_balancer_method _default_lbmethod = {
"byrequests",
find_best_byrequests,
NULL
};
... and then in the child_init of balancer:
for (i = 0; i < conf->balancers->nelts; i++) {
init_balancer_members(conf, s, balancer);
/* Initialize default lbmethod */
if (!balancer->lbmethod->finder) {
balancer->lbmethod = &_default_lbmethod;
}
balancer++;
}
This resolves core dump, but does not resolve the config params.
Regards,
Mladen.
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
On Aug 19, 2005, at 11:05 AM, Mladen Turk wrote:
> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>> What platform... seems to work fine under Linux and OS X.
>>
>>
>
> Windows
>
>
>> This is what add_lbmethods does...
>>
>>
>
> It adds the method, but remember, the widows don't have fork,
> so probably the data from parent is not there.
>
The data is stored within the basic proxy data structs, so I
don't see how fork has anything to do with it... I must
be missing something obvious... sorry.
During the create_proxy_config() stage, the load
lbmethods hook is run. This hook pushes into
proxy_server_conf->lbmethods 2 proxy_balancer_method
structs, which contain the name and function pointers
for the 2 methods.
When ap_proxy_add_balancer() is called, it creates the
proxy_server_conf->balancers entry (proxy_balancer_method)
and then sets it to the byrequests method by scanning through the
proxy_server_conf->lbmethods array for it. It then
sets the proxy_balancer_method->lbmethod to that pointer.
All this is within the per server data structs...
Is it a scope issue because find_best_bytraffic is defined
as static...? Hmmm. I need to look into that.
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by Mladen Turk <mt...@apache.org>.
Jim Jagielski wrote:
> What platform... seems to work fine under Linux and OS X.
>
Windows
> This is what add_lbmethods does...
>
It adds the method, but remember, the widows don't have fork,
so probably the data from parent is not there.
> Did you do a complete make diskclean and then rebuild?
>
Right, fresh from the SVN.
I always do a SVN co when doing release check.
Regards,
Mladen.
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by Jim Jagielski <Ji...@apache.org>.
What platform... seems to work fine under Linux and OS X.
This is what add_lbmethods does...
Did you do a complete make diskclean and then rebuild?
On Aug 19, 2005, at 8:06 AM, Mladen Turk wrote:
> Paul Querna wrote:
>
>> Just a heads up, I am planning to RM and tag 2.1.7 (and re-branch
>> from
>> trunk the 2.2.x branch) on Friday or Saturday this week. I intend to
>> include APR and APR-Util 1.2.1 with this release.
>> As long as 2.1.7 seems good, I would like to do a vote on making
>> it a Beta.
>>
>>
>
> I have temporary fixed the load balancer with the ugly hack.
> What is missing is the setup for the method finder function.
>
> Seems Jim committed that but never implemented the actual
> setup for the function pointer itself.
>
> With my hack the load balancer at least does not core dump,
> but it is a regression from previous implementation, because
> right now the by-requests method is used.
>
>
> Jim, if you can either fix that or revert your patch we'll be
> able to release the 2.1.7.
>
> Regards,
> Mladen.
>
>
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by Mladen Turk <mt...@apache.org>.
Paul Querna wrote:
> Just a heads up, I am planning to RM and tag 2.1.7 (and re-branch from
> trunk the 2.2.x branch) on Friday or Saturday this week. I intend to
> include APR and APR-Util 1.2.1 with this release.
>
> As long as 2.1.7 seems good, I would like to do a vote on making it a Beta.
>
I have temporary fixed the load balancer with the ugly hack.
What is missing is the setup for the method finder function.
Seems Jim committed that but never implemented the actual
setup for the function pointer itself.
With my hack the load balancer at least does not core dump,
but it is a regression from previous implementation, because
right now the by-requests method is used.
Jim, if you can either fix that or revert your patch we'll be
able to release the 2.1.7.
Regards,
Mladen.
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by Joe Orton <jo...@redhat.com>.
On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 06:28:56PM -0500, William Rowe wrote:
> At 03:36 AM 8/18/2005, Joe Orton wrote:
> >On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 10:43:01PM -0700, Paul Querna wrote:
> >> Just a heads up, I am planning to RM and tag 2.1.7 (and re-branch from
> >> trunk the 2.2.x branch) on Friday or Saturday this week. I intend to
> >> include APR and APR-Util 1.2.1 with this release.
> >
> >Sounds great. Can you exclude the mod_setenvif OID() changes? I don't
> >think they are ready for release.
>
> Unless you trip the feature deliberately, this won't interfere
> with anyone using the current trunk, would it?
>
> Yes, the feature might be 'experimental', but I don't think
> it's harmful. Am I mistaken?
Just that a 2.1.x beta release should resemble the final 2.2.0 interface
as closely as possible, and this isn't going to make it to 2.2.0
as-is...
joe
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
At 03:36 AM 8/18/2005, Joe Orton wrote:
>On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 10:43:01PM -0700, Paul Querna wrote:
>> Just a heads up, I am planning to RM and tag 2.1.7 (and re-branch from
>> trunk the 2.2.x branch) on Friday or Saturday this week. I intend to
>> include APR and APR-Util 1.2.1 with this release.
>
>Sounds great. Can you exclude the mod_setenvif OID() changes? I don't
>think they are ready for release.
Unless you trip the feature deliberately, this won't interfere
with anyone using the current trunk, would it?
Yes, the feature might be 'experimental', but I don't think
it's harmful. Am I mistaken?
Bill
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by Joe Orton <jo...@redhat.com>.
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 10:43:01PM -0700, Paul Querna wrote:
> Just a heads up, I am planning to RM and tag 2.1.7 (and re-branch from
> trunk the 2.2.x branch) on Friday or Saturday this week. I intend to
> include APR and APR-Util 1.2.1 with this release.
Sounds great. Can you exclude the mod_setenvif OID() changes? I don't
think they are ready for release.
mod_setenvif.c @ rev 153384
was the last good one.
joe
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by Mladen Turk <mt...@apache.org>.
Paul Querna wrote:
> Just a heads up, I am planning to RM and tag 2.1.7 (and re-branch from
> trunk the 2.2.x branch) on Friday or Saturday this week. I intend to
> include APR and APR-Util 1.2.1 with this release.
>
------ Build started: Project: mod_setenvif, Configuration: Release
Win32 ------
Creating Version Resource
Compiling...
mod_setenvif.c
mod_setenvif.c(97) : fatal error C1083: Cannot open include file:
'mod_ssl.h': No such file or directory
Also, the InstallBin is failing because:
copy modules\metadata\Release\mod_setenvif.so
"C:\W\apache\head\modules" <.y
The system cannot find the file specified.
NMAKE : fatal error U1077: 'copy' : return code '0x1'
I'll see if I can fix that.
Regards,
Mladen.
Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
docs@httpd'ers...
As Paul mentions below, on Friday (probably 1 a.m. ;-) he will
tag 2.1.7. This is just a reminder to our most excellent doco
team that, once ack'ed - this becomes 2.1 beta, and then...
(drum roll please...) 2.2 GA(!)
So if you had changes to catch up with 2.1 that perhaps have
been sitting in your local checkouts, now is an excellent time
to commit the docs improvements.
Each release, we state "v x.x is the best available version
of Apache", and certainly the docs@ team has proven this!
When 2.2 final (not beta, not alpha) drops, we certainly all
want this to be true not only of the code, but also of the
accompanying documentation! And I trust you will make it so.
Yours,
Bill
p.s. it's been a while - have I told you all lately that
you rock?!?
:)
At 12:43 AM 8/18/2005, Paul Querna wrote:
>Just a heads up, I am planning to RM and tag 2.1.7 (and re-branch from
>trunk the 2.2.x branch) on Friday or Saturday this week. I intend to
>include APR and APR-Util 1.2.1 with this release.
>
>As long as 2.1.7 seems good, I would like to do a vote on making it a Beta.
>
>Thanks,
>
>-Paul