You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by rb...@covalent.net on 2000/12/12 22:08:54 UTC
Tarball names.... :-(
ARGH! The repository re-org leaves us with an interesting question. What
is the name of the tarballs? I am using apache_2.0a9 for this release,
because that will cause the least confusion IMO. If we want to change the
name for beta 1 nothing stops us. This is probably a discussion we should
have before we try to roll B1.
Ryan
_______________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: Tarball names.... :-(
Posted by fi...@ebuilt.com.
> ARGH! The repository re-org leaves us with an interesting question. What
> is the name of the tarballs? I am using apache_2.0a9 for this release,
> because that will cause the least confusion IMO. If we want to change the
> name for beta 1 nothing stops us. This is probably a discussion we should
> have before we try to roll B1.
It is not desirable to have the repository module name and the export
directory name be the same -- exports should always be separate from
your normal checkouts.
I say call it apache_httpd_2_0_0a9
....Roy