From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25775 invoked by uid 1002); 16 Nov 2003 23:29:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-alpha-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-alpha@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 18651 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2003 23:29:21 -0000 Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 18:29:20 -0500 From: Aron Griffis To: gentoo-alpha@gentoo.org Message-ID: <20031116232920.GC25067@time> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-alpha@gentoo.org References: <20031116211530.55bb2f69.gigerstyle@gmx.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="nmemrqcdn5VTmUEE" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031116211530.55bb2f69.gigerstyle@gmx.ch> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i Subject: Re: [gentoo-alpha] Apache update to 2.0.48 X-Archives-Salt: 44569582-1123-46f3-aa3d-78f4877031a5 X-Archives-Hash: 0b2bb0ac6ac296b33c8ee57f3eb4957f --nmemrqcdn5VTmUEE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Marc Giger wrote: [Sun Nov 16 2003, 03:15:30PM EST] > Whats your opinion to mark apache 2.0.48 stable? I think it would be a > good idea to switch to the same version as on x86. Yep, good idea. I've been running 2.0.47 for a long time. I just marked 2.0.48-r1 stable on alpha. Aron --=20 Aron Griffis Gentoo Linux Developer Key fingerprint =3D E3B6 8734 C2D6 B5E5 AE76 FB3A 26B1 C5E3 2010 4EB0 --nmemrqcdn5VTmUEE Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE/uAhQJrHF4yAQTrARAj0xAJ9JscCV1cj20RENb9WXatBZPFShvgCgmLC0 SEiDoeLiVgfQdkwWUTjfAvI= =IWk4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nmemrqcdn5VTmUEE--