[Discuss] -deps package revisioning

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

On 5/20/2011 4:48 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> 
> ONLY the -deps tarballs have been changed/updated to include
> apr-1.4.5/apu-1.3.12; Since these are provided as a service,
> I see no reason to require a whole new vote, nor to invalidate
> any votes on 2.3.12-beta proper.

On the subject of your post, totally agree, we can wait a bit
longer for httpd-2.3.13(Win64) signatures :)  Not many changes
here since beta tag.

But here's the meta issue; how will httpd, moving forward, deal
with revisioning -deps when there is no sensible reason to have
a new httpd release?

Re: [Discuss] -deps package revisioning

[Igor Galić <i....@brainsware.org>]

----- Original Message -----
> On 5/20/2011 4:48 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> > 
> > ONLY the -deps tarballs have been changed/updated to include
> > apr-1.4.5/apu-1.3.12; Since these are provided as a service,
> > I see no reason to require a whole new vote, nor to invalidate
> > any votes on 2.3.12-beta proper.
> 
> On the subject of your post, totally agree, we can wait a bit
> longer for httpd-2.3.13(Win64) signatures :)  Not many changes
> here since beta tag.
> 
> But here's the meta issue; how will httpd, moving forward, deal
> with revisioning -deps when there is no sensible reason to have
> a new httpd release?

It's been said before, and I'm talking about the moving forward
part here: For 2.4 we should *drop* -deps
We'll have to link to them one way or the other, but mirroring,
I believe, is the wrong way.

Recommending the appropriate seems more sensible to me.

i

-- 
Igor Galić

Tel: +43 (0) 664 886 22 883
Mail: i.galic@brainsware.org
URL: http://brainsware.org/