state of the release candidate

["William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>]

For apr 1.3 we have +1's from ruidiger, bojan, jim, guenter, -1 from sander
for the darwin fault confirmed by jeff.  At 120 hours into the release I'll
revert apr/poll to rev 1.3.3 and reroll, unless someone cares to offer the
appropriate changes to autoconf, because I agree that introducing segfaults
and kernel panics in a minor point bump is rude :)  We'll try to keep the
new release voting period very abbreviated, say 24 hours, since the major
gruntwork of testing is already done.  But please get this done.

For util 1.3 we have +1's from ruidiger, sander, guenter, -1 from bojan,
jim and I'm a little confused why a not-a-regression test module flaw
would halt a release, but be that as it may, I'm willing to reroll
this as we are reconsidering apr 1.3.  Again, a short vote.

New tarballs happen in 14 hours, so Darwin fans, get cracking, please :-/

Re: state of the release candidate

[Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>]

On Jun 2, 2009, at 6:07 PM, Bojan Smojver wrote:

> On Tue, 2009-06-02 at 10:50 -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>> 1 from bojan,
>> jim and I'm a little confused why a not-a-regression test module flaw
>> would halt a release
>
> Practical reasons only. We already had fixes committed and it looked
> like APR was going to be re-rolled, so doing APU as well seemed like  
> the
> right thing to do.
>

+1... best version available and all that.

Re: state of the release candidate

[Bojan Smojver <bo...@rexursive.com>]

On Tue, 2009-06-02 at 10:50 -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> 1 from bojan,
> jim and I'm a little confused why a not-a-regression test module flaw
> would halt a release

Practical reasons only. We already had fixes committed and it looked
like APR was going to be re-rolled, so doing APU as well seemed like the
right thing to do.

-- 
Bojan

Re: state of the release candidate

["William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>]

William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> For apr 1.3 we have +1's from ruidiger, bojan, jim, guenter, -1 from sander
> for the darwin fault confirmed by jeff.  At 120 hours into the release I'll
> revert apr/poll to rev 1.3.3 and reroll, unless someone cares to offer the
> appropriate changes to autoconf, because I agree that introducing segfaults
> and kernel panics in a minor point bump is rude :)  We'll try to keep the
> new release voting period very abbreviated, say 24 hours, since the major
> gruntwork of testing is already done.  But please get this done.

The patch I will revert, unless someone argues otherwise, is modifying the
case *-apple-darwin[[0-8]].*) to *-apple-darwin*) for today in branch 1.3.

The origin was;

Revision 589519 - (view) (download) (annotate) - [select for diffs]
Modified Mon Oct 29 06:39:54 2007 UTC (19 months ago) by pquerna
Original Path: apr/apr/trunk/build/apr_hints.m4
File length: 14247 byte(s)
Diff to previous 550877 (colored)

On 10.5/Leopard, enable KQueue and Poll, since both seem to work correctly,
and all test cases pass.  If people could test their apr_pollset using
applications to make sure KQueue support is solid, that would be very helpful.