You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com> on 2011/03/01 18:25:23 UTC
[VOTE] Release 2.3.11 as Beta
The Apache httpd 2.3.11-beta test tarballs are available at:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
Please vote on whether to release as 2.3.11-beta.
This is our first Beta release; Based on the feedback and result
from this Beta, the hope is to push for a GA by the end of
March (2011)!
Vote will close in 72 hours.
[RESULT] Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.11 as Beta
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
The results of the VOTE are:
+1: Jim Jagielski
Rainer Jung
Eric Covener
Dan Poirier
+0: Nick Kew
Igor Galic
(+0 as "looks goods" but without officially voting +1)
As such, the Vote Passes!
My plan is to let the mirrors have the weekend to sync up and
then announce on Monday...
Thanks!
On Mar 1, 2011, at 12:25 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> The Apache httpd 2.3.11-beta test tarballs are available at:
>
> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
>
> Please vote on whether to release as 2.3.11-beta.
>
> This is our first Beta release; Based on the feedback and result
> from this Beta, the hope is to push for a GA by the end of
> March (2011)!
>
> Vote will close in 72 hours.
>
Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.11 as Beta
Posted by Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 12:25 PM, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jagunet.com> wrote:
> The Apache httpd 2.3.11-beta test tarballs are available at:
>
> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
>
> Please vote on whether to release as 2.3.11-beta.
+1 AIX/PPC32 xlc all tests pass.
Re: GA
Posted by "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
On 3/17/2011 12:34 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 3/17/2011 10:34 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Stefan Fritsch <sf...@sfritsch.de> wrote:
>>> On Tuesday 01 March 2011, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>>> This is our first Beta release; Based on the feedback and result
>>>> from this Beta, the hope is to push for a GA by the end of
>>>> March (2011)!
>>>
>>> FWIW, I would prefer another beta in April and tagging GA at or
>>> directly after the hackathon at Knockree (mid-May). There are still a
>>> number of things I want to have in 2.4 but I won't have much time in
>>> March.
>>
>> That sounds reasonable to me, but then I have my own little project
>> I'd like to finish up in time for the next beta :)
>
> I'd like to go ahead with a fresh beta image before month end, and am happy
> to RM one. Whatever is in the tree by the 28th will be in the next beta,
> but I'd still expect a (last?) beta following Knockree. It's been several
> weeks since the last beta and was never even published on our site. So lets
> go ahead and freshen it frequently.
(And perhaps another in the later part of April, too?) That would end up
giving us a fresh beta roughly every 3-4 weeks.
Re: GA
Posted by "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
On 3/17/2011 10:34 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Stefan Fritsch <sf...@sfritsch.de> wrote:
>> On Tuesday 01 March 2011, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>> This is our first Beta release; Based on the feedback and result
>>> from this Beta, the hope is to push for a GA by the end of
>>> March (2011)!
>>
>> FWIW, I would prefer another beta in April and tagging GA at or
>> directly after the hackathon at Knockree (mid-May). There are still a
>> number of things I want to have in 2.4 but I won't have much time in
>> March.
>
> That sounds reasonable to me, but then I have my own little project
> I'd like to finish up in time for the next beta :)
I'd like to go ahead with a fresh beta image before month end, and am happy
to RM one. Whatever is in the tree by the 28th will be in the next beta,
but I'd still expect a (last?) beta following Knockree. It's been several
weeks since the last beta and was never even published on our site. So lets
go ahead and freshen it frequently.
Re: GA
Posted by Jeff Trawick <tr...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 2:31 PM, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jagunet.com> wrote:
>
> On Mar 17, 2011, at 11:34 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Stefan Fritsch <sf...@sfritsch.de> wrote:
>>> On Tuesday 01 March 2011, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>>> This is our first Beta release; Based on the feedback and result
>>>> from this Beta, the hope is to push for a GA by the end of
>>>> March (2011)!
>>>
>>> FWIW, I would prefer another beta in April and tagging GA at or
>>> directly after the hackathon at Knockree (mid-May). There are still a
>>> number of things I want to have in 2.4 but I won't have much time in
>>> March.
>>
>> That sounds reasonable to me, but then I have my own little project
>> I'd like to finish up in time for the next beta :)
>>
>
> My plan is to have another beta the end of March, another
> in April and GA in May (at the latest)...
>
> Sound reasonable?
+1
Re: GA
Posted by "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
On 3/17/2011 3:40 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 3/17/2011 1:31 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>
>> My plan is to have another beta the end of March, another
>> in April and GA in May (at the latest)...
>
> Well, if we presume that people will invent and collaborate to refine
> some "cool stuff" at Wicklow, it isn't unreasonable to guess that such
> a tarball would still be beta and need several weeks of a "large group"
> of final testers and some bug fixes to be realistically be "the best
> available version" and more robust than 2.2.17 in June. I will vote
> against declaring 'ga' any taraball which can't meet that self-described
> label that we've assign to every general release for over a dozen years :)
Which was to say, if there are no changes in May that could reasonably be
expected to cause a regression, then the May candidate might be suited
to be GA, but might be better described as /final beta/. We would have
the best sense of this during the Wicklow hackathon/weekend.
Re: GA
Posted by "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
On 3/18/2011 3:01 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> My hopes are that if people are really wanting to invent and collaborate
> on cool stuff, that they don't wait until a f2f event that the vast
> majority of current httpd developers will not be attending and
> will instead try to start stuff now-ish in hopes of getting a
> GA out sooner rather than changing things so much that any
> momentum achieved up to now is wasted by the addition of lots
> of cool stuff that requires substantial vetting and thus causing
> yet more delays on a release that has already been long enough
> already thank you.
And of course, there is an argument that if the 'final' improvements
are picked up by a late April beta, whomever makes it to wicklow can
start looking at what should be in httpd 3.0, even as 2.4 is introduced
to the world :)
Re: GA
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
On Mar 19, 2011, at 6:50 AM, Dan Poirier wrote:
> On Fri. 2011-03-18 at 09:03 PM EDT, Nick Kew <ni...@webthing.com> wrote:
>
>> On 19 Mar 2011, at 00:02, Dan Poirier wrote:
>>
>>> At some point, do we declare a feature-freeze for what will be 2.4.0?
>>
>> Features can be added during a release.
>
> I was just thinking of a temporary pause, that might be helpful in
> getting to a point where trunk is stable enough to feel comfortable
> declaring it 2.4.0.
>
> Maybe we don't need anything that formal. I get the sense that a few
> people have things they'd like to get in before "2.4.0" for some reason,
> but we hardly have a continuous stream of new features being added.
>
I think as we get closer to GA, most people will be more circumspect
about changing the API willy-nilly... if it needs to be done, then
it should be. 2.4 will be out there, as previous history clearly
shows, for quite a Long Time, and we should ensure the API is
what we need it to be.
Re: GA
Posted by Dan Poirier <po...@pobox.com>.
On Fri. 2011-03-18 at 09:03 PM EDT, Nick Kew <ni...@webthing.com> wrote:
> On 19 Mar 2011, at 00:02, Dan Poirier wrote:
>
>> At some point, do we declare a feature-freeze for what will be 2.4.0?
>
> Features can be added during a release.
I was just thinking of a temporary pause, that might be helpful in
getting to a point where trunk is stable enough to feel comfortable
declaring it 2.4.0.
Maybe we don't need anything that formal. I get the sense that a few
people have things they'd like to get in before "2.4.0" for some reason,
but we hardly have a continuous stream of new features being added.
Dan
Re: GA
Posted by Nick Kew <ni...@webthing.com>.
On 19 Mar 2011, at 00:02, Dan Poirier wrote:
> At some point, do we declare a feature-freeze for what will be 2.4.0?
Features can be added during a release.
We will of course need an MMN-major freeze, which is the branch's
promise of API/ABI back-compatibility. But we can still also add
to the API provided we don't break anything.
--
Nick Kew
Re: GA
Posted by Dan Poirier <po...@pobox.com>.
On Fri. 2011-03-18 at 04:01 PM EDT, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com> wrote:
> My hopes are that if people are really wanting to invent and collaborate
> on cool stuff, that they don't wait until a f2f event that the vast
> majority of current httpd developers will not be attending and
> will instead try to start stuff now-ish in hopes of getting a
> GA out sooner rather than changing things so much that any
> momentum achieved up to now is wasted by the addition of lots
> of cool stuff that requires substantial vetting and thus causing
> yet more delays on a release that has already been long enough
> already thank you.
At some point, do we declare a feature-freeze for what will be 2.4.0?
Re: GA
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
On Mar 17, 2011, at 4:40 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 3/17/2011 1:31 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>
>> On Mar 17, 2011, at 11:34 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Stefan Fritsch <sf...@sfritsch.de> wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday 01 March 2011, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>>>> This is our first Beta release; Based on the feedback and result
>>>>> from this Beta, the hope is to push for a GA by the end of
>>>>> March (2011)!
>>>>
>>>> FWIW, I would prefer another beta in April and tagging GA at or
>>>> directly after the hackathon at Knockree (mid-May). There are still a
>>>> number of things I want to have in 2.4 but I won't have much time in
>>>> March.
>>>
>>> That sounds reasonable to me, but then I have my own little project
>>> I'd like to finish up in time for the next beta :)
>>>
>>
>> My plan is to have another beta the end of March, another
>> in April and GA in May (at the latest)...
>
> Well, if we presume that people will invent and collaborate to refine
> some "cool stuff" at Wicklow, it isn't unreasonable to guess that such
> a tarball would still be beta and need several weeks of a "large group"
> of final testers and some bug fixes to be realistically be "the best
> available version" and more robust than 2.2.17 in June. I will vote
> against declaring 'ga' any taraball which can't meet that self-described
> label that we've assign to every general release for over a dozen years :)
>
My hopes are that if people are really wanting to invent and collaborate
on cool stuff, that they don't wait until a f2f event that the vast
majority of current httpd developers will not be attending and
will instead try to start stuff now-ish in hopes of getting a
GA out sooner rather than changing things so much that any
momentum achieved up to now is wasted by the addition of lots
of cool stuff that requires substantial vetting and thus causing
yet more delays on a release that has already been long enough
already thank you.
*grin*
Re: GA
Posted by "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
On 3/17/2011 1:31 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> On Mar 17, 2011, at 11:34 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Stefan Fritsch <sf...@sfritsch.de> wrote:
>>> On Tuesday 01 March 2011, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>>> This is our first Beta release; Based on the feedback and result
>>>> from this Beta, the hope is to push for a GA by the end of
>>>> March (2011)!
>>>
>>> FWIW, I would prefer another beta in April and tagging GA at or
>>> directly after the hackathon at Knockree (mid-May). There are still a
>>> number of things I want to have in 2.4 but I won't have much time in
>>> March.
>>
>> That sounds reasonable to me, but then I have my own little project
>> I'd like to finish up in time for the next beta :)
>>
>
> My plan is to have another beta the end of March, another
> in April and GA in May (at the latest)...
Well, if we presume that people will invent and collaborate to refine
some "cool stuff" at Wicklow, it isn't unreasonable to guess that such
a tarball would still be beta and need several weeks of a "large group"
of final testers and some bug fixes to be realistically be "the best
available version" and more robust than 2.2.17 in June. I will vote
against declaring 'ga' any taraball which can't meet that self-described
label that we've assign to every general release for over a dozen years :)
Re: GA
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
On Mar 17, 2011, at 11:34 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Stefan Fritsch <sf...@sfritsch.de> wrote:
>> On Tuesday 01 March 2011, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>> This is our first Beta release; Based on the feedback and result
>>> from this Beta, the hope is to push for a GA by the end of
>>> March (2011)!
>>
>> FWIW, I would prefer another beta in April and tagging GA at or
>> directly after the hackathon at Knockree (mid-May). There are still a
>> number of things I want to have in 2.4 but I won't have much time in
>> March.
>
> That sounds reasonable to me, but then I have my own little project
> I'd like to finish up in time for the next beta :)
>
My plan is to have another beta the end of March, another
in April and GA in May (at the latest)...
Sound reasonable?
Re: GA
Posted by Jeff Trawick <tr...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Stefan Fritsch <sf...@sfritsch.de> wrote:
> On Tuesday 01 March 2011, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> This is our first Beta release; Based on the feedback and result
>> from this Beta, the hope is to push for a GA by the end of
>> March (2011)!
>
> FWIW, I would prefer another beta in April and tagging GA at or
> directly after the hackathon at Knockree (mid-May). There are still a
> number of things I want to have in 2.4 but I won't have much time in
> March.
That sounds reasonable to me, but then I have my own little project
I'd like to finish up in time for the next beta :)
GA
Posted by Stefan Fritsch <sf...@sfritsch.de>.
On Tuesday 01 March 2011, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> This is our first Beta release; Based on the feedback and result
> from this Beta, the hope is to push for a GA by the end of
> March (2011)!
FWIW, I would prefer another beta in April and tagging GA at or
directly after the hackathon at Knockree (mid-May). There are still a
number of things I want to have in 2.4 but I won't have much time in
March.
Really nice to have would be:
- change ap_pcfg_* API to allow error handling (working on it)
- change mod_include to (optionally) use the new ap_expr parser
- add document_root to request_rec (there was a patch on the list
IIRC) for use in mass vhost modules
Less important but still nice to have:
- Fix Solaris LDAP support (PR 42682). This needs no API change but
the chance of breaking something is so high that I fear the fix would
never be backported to 2.4.x.
Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.11 as Beta
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
On Mar 1, 2011, at 12:25 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> The Apache httpd 2.3.11-beta test tarballs are available at:
>
> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
>
> Please vote on whether to release as 2.3.11-beta.
>
> This is our first Beta release; Based on the feedback and result
> from this Beta, the hope is to push for a GA by the end of
> March (2011)!
>
> Vote will close in 72 hours.
>
+1 from me:
OS X 10.6.6.
RHEL6 (64 bit)
Fedora 14 (32 bit)
Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.11 as Beta
Posted by Rainer Jung <ra...@kippdata.de>.
On 01.03.2011 18:25, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> The Apache httpd 2.3.11-beta test tarballs are available at:
>
> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
>
> Please vote on whether to release as 2.3.11-beta.
>
> This is our first Beta release; Based on the feedback and result
> from this Beta, the hope is to push for a GA by the end of
> March (2011)!
>
> Vote will close in 72 hours.
+1 (beta)
- Sigs and hashes OK
- contents of tarballs identical
- contents of tag and tarballs identical
except for expected deltas
Build on Solaris 8+10 Sparc, SuSE 10 32 and RHEL 5 64
- with shared and with static modules
- with module set all
- against bundled APR, external APR/APU 1.4/1.3 and external trunk APR
(r1076314 with dso support enabled)
- using expat 2.0.1, pcre 8.11, openssl 0.9.8q, lua 5.1.4
- Tool chain:
- platform gcc except for Solaris 8 (gcc 4.1.2)
- CFLAGS: -O2 -g -Wall -fno-strict-aliasing
(and -mpcu=v9 on Solaris)
Passed test framework on all those platforms for all available MPMs
(except simple)
- with shared and static modules using the "all" module set
- with bundled APR, external APR 1.4 and external trunk APR
Regards,
Rainer
Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.11 as Beta
Posted by Dan Poirier <po...@pobox.com>.
On Tue. 2011-03-01 at 12:25 PM EST, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com> wrote:
> The Apache httpd 2.3.11-beta test tarballs are available at:
>
> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
>
> Please vote on whether to release as 2.3.11-beta.
>
> This is our first Beta release; Based on the feedback and result
> from this Beta, the hope is to push for a GA by the end of
> March (2011)!
>
> Vote will close in 72 hours.
+1
Downloads good, checksums passed, signature points to Jim.
Built and tested on RHEL5 ia32 with apr-1.4.2 and apr-util-1.3.10.
Dan
Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.11 as Beta
Posted by Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com>.
>> The Apache httpd 2.3.11-beta test tarballs are available at:
FYI t/apache/if_sections blew up when I didn't have proxy configured
(fat-fingered configure line)
Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.11 as Beta
Posted by Nick Kew <ni...@webthing.com>.
On Tue, 1 Mar 2011 12:25:23 -0500
Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com> wrote:
> The Apache httpd 2.3.11-beta test tarballs are available at:
>
> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
>
> Please vote on whether to release as 2.3.11-beta.
>
> This is our first Beta release; Based on the feedback and result
> from this Beta, the hope is to push for a GA by the end of
> March (2011)!
>
> Vote will close in 72 hours.
Looking good on maemo.
Not tested on more mainstream platforms. May do tomorrow
if I find a round tuit.
--
Nick Kew
Available for work, contract or permanent.
http://www.webthing.com/~nick/cv.html
Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.11 as Beta
Posted by Igor Galić <i....@brainsware.org>.
----- Original Message -----
> The Apache httpd 2.3.11-beta test tarballs are available at:
>
> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
>
> Please vote on whether to release as 2.3.11-beta.
>
> This is our first Beta release; Based on the feedback and result
> from this Beta, the hope is to push for a GA by the end of
> March (2011)!
>
> Vote will close in 72 hours.
Debian stable (6.0) amd64
gcc 4.4.5
CFLAGS="-s -mtune=core2 -O2 -fpic -fPIC"
CXXFLAGS="-s -mtune=core2 -O2 -fpic -fPIC"
LDFLAGS="-Wl,-s -Wl,--as-needed -Wl,--reduce-memory-overheads"
./configure --enable-mods-shared=reallyall --enable-pie --with-included-apr --enable-ldap --enable-dbd --enable-ssl --with-ssl=/opt/bw --with-ldap-include=/opt/bw/include --with-ldap-lib=/opt/bw/lib --with-ldap=ldap_r --enable-lua --enable-exception-hook --prefix=/opt/bw --libexecdir=/opt/bw/libexec/apache --datadir=/opt/bw/share/apache --sysconfdir=/etc/bw/apache
With OpenSSL 1.0.0d and lua 5.1 and system PCRE, only builds with:
LIBS=-lpcre added
>From my usual stack:
Doesn't build: subversion, mod_security, mod_perl, mod_passenger
Builds: mod_fcgid, mod_fcgid, mod_wsgi, mod_whatkilledus, mod_backtrace, mod_perlite, mod_proxy_html, mod_pony, mod_allowmethods (though redundant now)
Will put it in test tomorrow (and give my +1 :)
Good night,
i
--
Igor Galić
Tel: +43 (0) 664 886 22 883
Mail: i.galic@brainsware.org
URL: http://brainsware.org/