Re: 1.2.1

[Randy Terbush <ra...@zyzzyva.com>]

> Ok, if I can get a few ayes and no nays, I will redo 1.2.1 with the fixes,
> which are all committed now.  I would do it as 1.2.1, not 1.2.2, because
> 1.2.1 wasn't officially released yet (even though a few people picked it
> up from the dev site), and the changes are small enough that if a few
> people get the old 1.2.1 it won't kill them. 

ay for 1.2.1


> I'd also like some confirmation that following the how-to-release web page
> won't miss anything...

It is complete with exception of the PGP signing issues which I 
have not found the time to unencrypt. Did Dean already tag 
APACHE_1_2_1?

> Someone volunteered to do the announcement, didn't they?

I will if you still need a volunteer.

Re: 1.2.1

[Marc Slemko <ma...@worldgate.com>]

On Sat, 5 Jul 1997, Randy Terbush wrote:

> > I'd also like some confirmation that following the how-to-release web page
> > won't miss anything...
> 
> It is complete with exception of the PGP signing issues which I 
> have not found the time to unencrypt. Did Dean already tag 
> APACHE_1_2_1?

Yup.  The files that changed need to be retagged and at least one file
(httpd.conf-dist) wasn't tagged correctly first go round for some odd
reason... 

The PGP stuff can be done after I make the tarball.  I still think a md5
hash would be a good thing... my OS comes with md5.  My OS don't come with
pgp.  Yes, PGP provides more verification that www.apache.org hasn't been
broken into but a md5 hash is still useful.

> 
> > Someone volunteered to do the announcement, didn't they?
> 
> I will if you still need a volunteer.

Well, I don't have one yet, so... you can be it.  <g>

(says Marc happily as he manages to avoid doing yet another announcement.)