On Feb 5, 2008 6:56 PM, Mark Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Rainer Jung wrote: > > Remy Maucherat wrote: > >> Rainer Jung wrote: > >>> Remy Maucherat schrieb: > >>>> The candidates binaries are available here: > >>>> http://people.apache.org/~remm/tomcat-6/v6.0.16/ > >>>> > >>>> According to the release process, the 6.0.16 tag is: > >>>> [ ] Broken > >>>> [ ] Alpha > >>>> [ ] Beta > >>>> [X] Stable > >>>> > >>>> Rémy > >>> > >>> One small note: there is a new Thumbs.db file in > >>> server/webapps/host-manager/images which doesn't come from svn and > >>> wasn't there in 6.0.14. I guess it was auto-generated by some of > >>> those smart service on the build system and we don't really want it > >>> in future releases. > >> > >> That's caused by me building on Windows [XP] for the Windows > >> installer. I can redo the binaries before putting them in the wild, > >> but obviously it shouldn't be a huge issue. > >> > >> Rémy > > > > I would agree with keeping the files we used for testing. No need for > > repackaging, ... > <snip /> > > As far as our voting goes, the only thing that matters is the source > release.
This IMO is a distortion of ASF policy - which I believe is that "every release needs the source - the binaries are a nice convenience" - but you've extrapolated that into something different. If those "convenience binaries" are provided as part of an official release then they do need PMC approval: http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what Niall > We are free to re-package the binaries as much, or as little, as > we wish providing we don't modify the build script since that would be > modifying the source. > Personally, I would repackage it but I am not that bothered about it. I am > happy which ever way Remy chooses to go on this. > > Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
