quetz-mod_python-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Martijn Moeling" <mart...@xs4us.nu>
Subject 3.3.0b tested on FC4, Py2.5
Date Tue, 19 Dec 2006 12:48:13 GMT
Hi,

I just installed:

Python 2.5 (with the usual TCL trouble for IDLE to work)
Mod_python 3.3.0b

So:

+1 Linux Fedora Core 4 i386, Apache 2.0.54 (mpm-prefork), Python 2.5


I found no problems with my application, It is running on a SEMI
production machine with +/- 10.000 hits a day. (Actually its my Dev
system running live whilst the production machine is not there yet, I'll
leave it running until our production machine will go live in the first
week of 2007)

Martijn


-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: Jim Gallacher [mailto:jpg@jgassociates.ca] 
Verzonden: Friday, December 15, 2006 3:06 PM
Aan: Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy
CC: python-dev@httpd.apache.org
Onderwerp: Re: Core vote [Re: mod_python 3.3.0 beta available for
testing]

Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
> 
> I concur - my +1 was for a beta

+1 for 3.3.0 beta

Jim


> grisha
> 
> On Wed, 13 Dec 2006, David Fraser wrote:
> 
>> I'm not "core" but I think its good practice to officially release 
>> this as a beta to the wider community before making it an actual
release.
>> I didn't test it because I was waiting for the core vote :-)
>>
>> David
>>
>> Jim Gallacher wrote:
>>> Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
>>> >
>>> > core +1 on releasing it into the wild
>>> >
>>> > grisha
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what we're voting on here, and I'm not sure what I
meant 
>>> by "the next level" either. :)
>>>
>>> Is this a vote to give 3.3.0 beta a wider release (apache mirrors
and 
>>> so on), or a vote to go right to the 3.3.0 final release?
>>>
>>> I'm +1 either way. As I recall we didn't get much additional testing

>>> as a result of uploading the betas to the apache mirrors in the
past. 
>>> The people most likely to chip in with testing are already here on 
>>> python-dev.
>>>
>>> Having the 3.2.x stable branch certainly facilitated releasing quick

>>> fixes for 3.2. There is no reason why we can't do the same with 3.3,

>>> so my inclination is to do an official 3.3.0 final release now
rather 
>>> than later.
>>>
>>> Jim
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, 11 Dec 2006, Jim Gallacher wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Test results so far, FYI. How long shall we wait until we kick it 
>>>>> up to the next level?
>>>>> - jim
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> +1 FreeBSD 6.1, Apache 2.2.3 (mpm-prefork), Python 2.4.3,1
>>>>> +1 Linux Debian 3.1 Sarge, Apache 2.0.54 (mpm-prefork), Python
2.3.5
>>>>> +1 Linux Debian Sid, Apache 2.2.3 (mpm-worker), Python 2.3.5
>>>>> +1 Linux Debian Sid, Apache 2.2.3 (mpm-worker), Python 2.4.4
>>>>> +1 Linux Debian Sid, Apache 2.2.3 (mpm-worker), Python 2.5
>>>>> +1 Linux Fedora Core 5 (i386), Apache 2.2.2 (mpm-prefork), Python 
>>>>> 2.4.3
>>>>> +1 Linux Fedora Core 5 i386, Apache 2.2.2 (mpm-prefork), Python
2.4.3
>>>>> +1 Linux Fedora Core 6, Apache 2.2.3 (mpm-prefork), Python 2.4.4
>>>>> +1 Linux Fedora Core 6 i386, Apache 2.2.3 (mpm-prefork), Python
2.4.4
>>>>> +1 Linux Fedora Core 6 x86_64, Apache 2.2.3 (mpm-prefork), Python 
>>>>> 2.4.4
>>>>> +1 Linux Slackware 10.2, Apache 2.2.3 (mpm-prefork), Python 2.4.1
>>>>> +1 Linux Ubuntu 6.0.6, Apache 2.0.55 (mpm-worker), Python 2.4.3
>>>>> +1 Linux Ubuntu 6.10, Apache 2.0.55 (mpm-prefork), Python 2.4.4c1
>>>>> +1 Mac OS X (Darwin 8.8.1), Apache 2.2.3 (mpm-prefork), Python
2.4.2
>>>>> +1 Mac OS X (PowerPC), Apache 2.2.1 (mpm-worker), Python 2.3.5 (OS

>>>>> Supplied Version)
>>>>> +1 Mac OS X (PowerPC), Apache 2.0.55 (mpm-worker), Python 2.3.5
(OS 
>>>>> Supplied Version)
>>>>> +1 Microsoft Windows XP, Apache 2.0.58 (mpm_winnt), Python 2.5
>>>>> +1 Microsoft Windows XP, Apache 2.0.58 (mpm_winnt), Python 2.4
>>>>> +1 Microsoft Windows XP, Apache 2.2.2 (mpm_winnt), Python 2.5
>>>>> +1 Microsoft Windows XP, Apache 2.2.2 (mpm_winnt), Python 2.4
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
> 


Mime
View raw message