Re: The madness has started...

[Brian Behlendorf <br...@organic.com>]

> No big deal. I have a 1.0.1 source release packaged and ready to
> be put on hyperreal. We can then begin building and providing
> binaries as well. The sooner we make a decision, the fewer people
> out there will have 1.0.0.

I have created a "patches" subdirectory in /apache/dist.  The idea, as 
outlined in a previous post: we put minor-bug-fix patches there before 
the next release, so that we don't have to roll a new release with every 
bug fixed.  New functionality patches would not appear there - if they 
are new modules which are candidates for inclusion in the regular 
distribution then they are put in contrib/modules, for example.

So, I would say roll the changes into a patch file and put it in 
"patches" (if we can all agree that this patch is acceptible to release), 
and then build the binaries from that.

Privately, I feel that the changes are minor enough, and the announcement
recent enough, that we can change the 1.0.0 in the dist area now without 
changing the level number.  Ugly as it may be.

	Brian

--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--
brian@organic.com  brian@hyperreal.com  http://www.[hyperreal,organic].com/

Re: The madness has started...

[Alexei Kosut <ak...@nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us>]

On Sat, 2 Dec 1995, Brian Behlendorf wrote:

> I have created a "patches" subdirectory in /apache/dist.  The idea, as 
> outlined in a previous post: we put minor-bug-fix patches there before 
> the next release, so that we don't have to roll a new release with every 
> bug fixed.  New functionality patches would not appear there - if they 
> are new modules which are candidates for inclusion in the regular 
> distribution then they are put in contrib/modules, for example.

I must say I don't like this idea. It just becomes a pain in the neck for 
the user. As someone who has *had* to download software plus dozens of 
patches, and then apply them, I can say this. Maybe it's easier for us, 
and makes us look better (whatever that gets us), but it's not very nice. 
I don't think the patches directory is a bad idea, neccessarily, but it 
should have files with patches between revisions (e.g. 
apache1.0.0.to.1.0.1.patch or whatnot).

In addition, the patches idea screws up our method of voting on changes. 
I say either

a) Remove the logging and cookie modules from the binaries, release them 
as 1.0, and throw them into /httpd/patches/for_Apache_1.0.1, and we'll 
vote on them later.

b) Patch it to 1.0.1 now, and change both the source and the binaries. 
(you can add a note to www.apache.org reminiscent of 0.6.4a, saying you 
don't need it unless you used one of the modules in question).

--/ Alexei Kosut <ak...@nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us> /--------/ Lefler on IRC
----------------------------/ <http://www.nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us/~akosut/>
The viewpoints expressed above are entirely false, and in no way
represent Alexei Kosut nor any other person or entity. /--------------