W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qa-dev@w3.org > December 2002

Re: [check] Progress on 0.6.2; and a new addition. :-)

From: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 20:15:44 +0100
To: QA Dev <public-qa-dev@w3.org>
cc: Frederic Schutz <schutz@mathgen.ch>, Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@iki.fi>
Message-ID: <a01060007-1022-47856E5C0ECF11D79AE800039300CF5C@[]>

With any kind of luck, Frederic should be receiving two copies of this. :-)

Since Olivier is unavailable for while list moderator issues are mostly on
hold until he returns -- hence your eternally queued message Frederic --
but Dom has added Frederic to the list so future messages should avoid
moderation delay.

For those that don't know, Frederic Shutz <schutz@mathgen.ch> has
volunteered to be our Debian packager. Welcome on board Frederic!

Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@iki.fi> wrote:

>Oh, and a cleanup suggestion: could the following files be 'cvs rm'd
>from dev.w3.org; they're outdated and add unnecessary confusion in the
>validator tarballs.  Remember, "cvs rm" doesn't *delete* the files,
>they're still accessible in CVS' Attic dirs, and can be easily restored
>if need be.
>httpd/cgi-bin/: traceroute, p3p, referers, LinkChecker.pl
>htdocs/:        p3p.html, favlets.html

Go ahead and "cvs rm" these. I checked with Dom on IRC and as far as we
could tell, only /traceroute was ever publically exposed -- and, as we all
know, "Cool URIs Don't Change" :-) -- and we need to make some changes to
account for that on v.w3.org, but these can be specific to there and don't
need to be in CVS. The rest are not (or no longer) used.

Dom: cf. our discussion on IRC:

  Could you dump the "Alice doesn't live here anymore" HTML from
  /traceroute, save it to /usr/local/validator/htdocs/traceroute.html,
  and remove the ScriptAlias for /traceroute from httpd.conf?

Oh, and about progress towards 0.6.2; the big issue for 0.6.2 -- the GET
vs. POST thing -- has been dealt with so I'm in no particular hurry to get
a new version out the door. But we still have quite a few issues that were
addressed after 0.6.1 was released and we have yet to nail down a good way
to distribute the "binary" packages.

I've created a 0.6.2 Release meta-bug in Bugzilla[0] (Bug #121). Please
think carefully about issues remaining that you want addressed for 0.6.2,
create bugs in Bugzilla for them, and add them as blockers for the

As a timing guide, I want to be ready to make a 0.6.2 release before the
end of the year (even if we choose to wait until later to actually do the
release) that is sufficiently solid that we won't need a 0.6.3 release, and
which deals with debs/rpms in a sufficiently sane manner that I won't walk
around feeling permanently guilty about not doing enough to support
Frederic and Ville in their packaging efforts. :-|

[0] - <http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=121>

Oh, and speaking of availability; I'll probably be mostly-offline from
Friday 20th until Friday 27th. I'll be off visiting the in-laws -- also
known as "Being A Good Boyfriend" :-) -- with metered ISDN dialup as the
only Internet access. IOW, do not expect replies to email in this period.

Of course we are the good guys! We define what is good and evil. All other
definitions are wrong, and possibly the product of a deranged imagination.
                                                         -- Stephen Harris
Received on Friday, 13 December 2002 14:16:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:36:23 UTC