You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Maxime Petazzoni <ma...@bulix.org> on 2005/12/20 20:46:29 UTC
mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha
Hi,
The mailing list archives browser mod_mbox [1] has been tagged and
released as v0.2 (Alpha) a few hours ago.
If you have some spare time and would like to try this new version,
you can find temporary tarballs and the ChangeLog in my
people.apache.org web space [2]. You can also checkout the Subversion
tag used to create the tarballs with the following command :
svn co https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/mod_mbox/tags/0.2 mod_mbox-0.2
Documentation on how to setup mod_mbox is available at the mod_mbox
website [3].
As far as I can tell, the version running on
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/ is not up-to-date. Some
parsing bugs have been fixed and thus the browsing experience may not
be the same as for this release.
Any feedback and vote for pursuing the release process is welcome.
Thank you for your interest in mod_mbox,
- Sam
[1] http://httpd.apache.org/mod_mbox/
[2] http://people.apache.org/~maxime/mod_mbox/
[3] http://httpd.apache.org/mod_mbox/install.html
PS: if you need some mailing archives to make mod_mbox run on, you can
use the following command to download dev@httpd archives :
rsync -avr svn.apache.org::public-arch/httpd.apache.org/dev/ dev/
--
Maxime Petazzoni (http://www.bulix.org)
-- gone crazy, back soon. leave message.
Re: mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha
Posted by Erik Abele <er...@codefaktor.de>.
On 20.12.2005, at 23:45, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Maxime Petazzoni wrote:
>> I was going to do that when I was told on #httpd-dev that it was
>> easier to drop it in my people.apache.org web space :
>> 16:45:08 colmmacc | well, that gets mirrored, I'd use
>> people.apache.org/~whatever/
>> 16:45:17 colmmacc | that's what the cool kids have used lately ;-)
>
> httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ is mirrored? Even if it is, just don't
> worry
> about that. Our convention is that anything in dev/dist/ is
> nothing but
> a candidate, not a proper release.
Just for the record: no, httpd.apache.org/dev/dist (minotaur:/www/
www.apache.org/dev/dist) is not mirrored - only www.apache.org/dist
(minotaur:/www/www.apache.org/dist) is mirrored.
Cheers,
Erik
Re: mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha
Posted by Maxime Petazzoni <ma...@bulix.org>.
* Sander Temme <sc...@apache.org> [2005-12-21 14:57:01]:
> I did no such thing. I could turn them on, but if the current state
> of the module makes you think they are already on, is that
> desirable?
My bad. They're just now On by default in mod_mbox :)
- Sam
--
Maxime Petazzoni (http://www.bulix.org)
-- gone crazy, back soon. leave message.
Re: mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha
Posted by Sander Temme <sc...@apache.org>.
On Dec 21, 2005, at 2:43 PM, Maxime Petazzoni wrote:
> * Sander Temme <sc...@apache.org> [2005-12-21 08:29:00]:
>
>> OK, Ajax is now running this drop. I will keep watch for cores
>> although if other folks could keep an eye out that would be great as
>> I'm kinda swamped.
>
> Great. I was going to ask the infra team to turn on the MboxAntispam
> and MboxHideEmpty directives, but it seems you made it while upgrading
> to 0.2rc1.
I did no such thing. I could turn them on, but if the current state
of the module makes you think they are already on, is that desirable?
S.
--
sander@temme.net http://www.temme.net/sander/
PGP FP: 51B4 8727 466A 0BC3 69F4 B7B8 B2BE BC40 1529 24AF
Re: mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha
Posted by Maxime Petazzoni <ma...@bulix.org>.
* Sander Temme <sc...@apache.org> [2005-12-21 08:29:00]:
> OK, Ajax is now running this drop. I will keep watch for cores
> although if other folks could keep an eye out that would be great as
> I'm kinda swamped.
Great. I was going to ask the infra team to turn on the MboxAntispam
and MboxHideEmpty directives, but it seems you made it while upgrading
to 0.2rc1.
Thanks !
- Sam
--
Maxime Petazzoni (http://www.bulix.org)
-- gone crazy, back soon. leave message.
Re: mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha
Posted by Sander Temme <sc...@apache.org>.
On Dec 21, 2005, at 12:00 AM, Maxime Petazzoni wrote:
> Ok, then let's start again. A mod_mbox release candidate,
> mod_mbox-0.2rc1, is available at
> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/mod_mbox/
OK, Ajax is now running this drop. I will keep watch for cores
although if other folks could keep an eye out that would be great as
I'm kinda swamped.
Drop checksums and signatures check out.
S.
--
sander@temme.net http://www.temme.net/sander/
PGP FP: 51B4 8727 466A 0BC3 69F4 B7B8 B2BE BC40 1529 24AF
Re: mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@gbiv.com>.
You guys are confusing each other to bits. We don't have release
candidates, we NEVER use m.n.v.rc1 versioning, and the thing that
Sam produced is called a tarball. We call it that because we don't
want people to believe it is a release until the PMC has voted to
release it. That's all there is to it.
Sam, you just need to follow the same process as all of our other
releases -- send a message to dev asking for votes on the tarball
for declaring it the 0.2.0 alpha release. Give it three days and,
at the end, if you have at least three +1s (including your own)
and a majority of positive votes for release, then you can move it
to the actual release dist and work on an announcement to go out
24hrs later.
....Roy
Re: mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>
> Um, no. We don't have release candidates. You followed the documented
> procedures correctly - you aren't the confused one. =) -- justin
Sorry, Justin. I just reviewed the Guidelines, and they are, simply, wrong.
"Email dev@httpd.apache.org, current-testers@httpd.apache.org and
stable-testers@httpd.apache.org to inform them of the release."
Uhm, this is not proper, there is no -release-. You might email dev@, and
(now) testers@ to inform them of a candidate, but not of a release, as there
is NO release without a vote.
"At this point, the release is an alpha. The Apache HTTP Server Project has
three classifications for its releases:
* Alpha
* Beta
* General Availability (GA)
Alpha indicates that the release is not meant for mainstream usage or may
have serious problems that prohibits its use. When a release is initially
created, it automatically becomes alpha quality."
Wrong on a single count. There is NO alpha until there is a vote. This was
the policy THROUGHOUT the tags of 2.0.n - we voted that a tarball was alpha,
then voted it beta. At 2.0.36 or so we voted it GA, but again, every "Release"
was voted on.
You know full well the ASF calls NOTHING a release that does not have its
endorsement, and the only way to obtain that endorsement is 3 +1's.
Until it has 3 +1's, it's nothing but a snapshot, pure and simple.
Re: mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 12:00:10AM +0100, Maxime Petazzoni wrote:
>
>>According to what Bill said, I'm now waiting for votes on making it
>>Alpha, Beta or GA.
>>
>>Thank you, and sorry for the mess. We should add a paragraph to the
>>Release Guidelines about the release candidate stage, this point is
>>not clear right out of the documentation.
>
>
> Um, no. We don't have release candidates. You followed the documented
> procedures correctly - you aren't the confused one. =) -- justin
Ok now I'M confused. You call something a release before it's voted on?
Justin, stop and explain, pick apart my misstatements for history and for
education of all of us. Don't simply shoot the messenger.
Is this just a matter of calling this a 'tarball' instead of a 'release
candidate'??? Sounds like nitpicking, but until it's voted on, this cannot
be a "Release to be voted on" right?
Bill
Re: mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 12:00:10AM +0100, Maxime Petazzoni wrote:
> According to what Bill said, I'm now waiting for votes on making it
> Alpha, Beta or GA.
>
> Thank you, and sorry for the mess. We should add a paragraph to the
> Release Guidelines about the release candidate stage, this point is
> not clear right out of the documentation.
Um, no. We don't have release candidates. You followed the documented
procedures correctly - you aren't the confused one. =) -- justin
Re: mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha
Posted by Maxime Petazzoni <ma...@bulix.org>.
Hi,
* William A. Rowe, Jr. <wr...@rowe-clan.net> [2005-12-20 16:45:33]:
> Simply call it a release candidate for now, that would work.
>
> >Anyway, if it is needed, I can create a mod_mbox subdir in /dev/dist
> >and put the tarballs in there. I was not really confident into
> >touching minotaur's DocumentRoot directory structure, that's why I
> >used this easier and safer solution.
>
> Don't panic :) And yes, the subdir makes it easier for users to find, IMHO.
> I've done the same for mod_aspdotnet snapshots.
Ok, then let's start again. A mod_mbox release candidate,
mod_mbox-0.2rc1, is available at
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/mod_mbox/
According to what Bill said, I'm now waiting for votes on making it
Alpha, Beta or GA.
Thank you, and sorry for the mess. We should add a paragraph to the
Release Guidelines about the release candidate stage, this point is
not clear right out of the documentation.
- Sam
--
Maxime Petazzoni (http://www.bulix.org)
-- gone crazy, back soon. leave message.
Re: mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Maxime Petazzoni wrote:
>
>>Maxime Petazzoni wrote:
>>
>>>The mailing list archives browser mod_mbox [1] has been tagged and
>>>released as v0.2 (Alpha) a few hours ago.
>>
>>Please be careful of the word 'released', it applies only to a
>>tarball which has recieved 3 +1's and more ayes than nays. We
>>usually call the 'before' file a release candidate, or simply tagged
>>and rolled.
>
> Yes, I should not have used to word 'released' itself, but I specified
> "as v0.2 *Alpha*" which should be enough to indicate that it's only
> for the first stage of the release process
Actually ;-p ... we do have true Alpha Releases, releases approved by the
project, yet not really slated for general availablility.
> So how should I call it ? If it's not yet Alpha, how do you publish
> the initial tarball that would eventually get the 3 +1 votes so it can
> become Alpha ?
Some projects have a voting system where they ask for 'your choice to release',
and users vote +1 alpha, beta, GA. If GA gets enough votes, that's it - a full
release. If GA fails but beta (counting the GA folks) gets enough, it's beta,
and if GA/beta fails, yet counting all the +1's there are enough for an alpha,
it's an official alpha release (with a 0.2-alpha.tar.gz sort of filename in the
main/mirrored distribution locations.)
Simply call it a release candidate for now, that would work.
> I was going to do that when I was told on #httpd-dev that it was
> easier to drop it in my people.apache.org web space :
>
> 16:45:08 colmmacc | well, that gets mirrored, I'd use people.apache.org/~whatever/
> 16:45:17 colmmacc | that's what the cool kids have used lately ;-)
httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ is mirrored? Even if it is, just don't worry
about that. Our convention is that anything in dev/dist/ is nothing but
a candidate, not a proper release.
> Anyway, if it is needed, I can create a mod_mbox subdir in /dev/dist
> and put the tarballs in there. I was not really confident into
> touching minotaur's DocumentRoot directory structure, that's why I
> used this easier and safer solution.
Don't panic :) And yes, the subdir makes it easier for users to find, IMHO.
I've done the same for mod_aspdotnet snapshots.
Bill
Re: mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha
Posted by Maxime Petazzoni <ma...@bulix.org>.
Hi,
* William A. Rowe, Jr. <wr...@rowe-clan.net> [2005-12-20 16:05:50]:
> Maxime Petazzoni wrote:
> >
> >The mailing list archives browser mod_mbox [1] has been tagged and
> >released as v0.2 (Alpha) a few hours ago.
>
> if you just created a new tarball, this isn't an alpha or 'released' just
> yet... you need votes on the release candidate tarball.
>
> Please be careful of the word 'released', it applies only to a
> tarball which has recieved 3 +1's and more ayes than nays. We
> usually call the 'before' file a release candidate, or simply tagged
> and rolled.
Yes, I should not have used to word 'released' itself, but I specified
"as v0.2 *Alpha*" which should be enough to indicate that it's only
for the first stage of the release process (as defined in the Apache
HTTP Server Release Guideline).
So how should I call it ? If it's not yet Alpha, how do you publish
the initial tarball that would eventually get the 3 +1 votes so it can
become Alpha ?
> In these httpd projects, we prefer to land candidates in the dev playground,
> /www/httpd.apache.org/dev/dist on people.apache.org, (which then maps to
> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/) and if you don't have permission
> (I -think- you should) we can ensure that you at least gain access to
> a mod_mbox/ subdirectory under that tree.
I was going to do that when I was told on #httpd-dev that it was
easier to drop it in my people.apache.org web space :
16:45:08 colmmacc | well, that gets mirrored, I'd use people.apache.org/~whatever/
16:45:17 colmmacc | that's what the cool kids have used lately ;-)
Anyway, if it is needed, I can create a mod_mbox subdir in /dev/dist
and put the tarballs in there. I was not really confident into
touching minotaur's DocumentRoot directory structure, that's why I
used this easier and safer solution.
- Sam
--
Maxime Petazzoni (http://www.bulix.org)
-- gone crazy, back soon. leave message.
Re: mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Maxime Petazzoni wrote:
>
> The mailing list archives browser mod_mbox [1] has been tagged and
> released as v0.2 (Alpha) a few hours ago.
Maxime,
if you just created a new tarball, this isn't an alpha or 'released' just yet...
you need votes on the release candidate tarball.
Please be careful of the word 'released', it applies only to a tarball which
has recieved 3 +1's and more ayes than nays. We usually call the 'before' file
a release candidate, or simply tagged and rolled.
In these httpd projects, we prefer to land candidates in the dev playground,
/www/httpd.apache.org/dev/dist on people.apache.org, (which then maps to
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/) and if you don't have permission
(I -think- you should) we can ensure that you at least gain access to
a mod_mbox/ subdirectory under that tree.
Bill