[Please upload] varnish-2.1.2-5 , varnish-2.1.4-5 and varnish-r5665-5

[jdzstz - gmail dot com <jdzstz at gmail dot com>]

About varnish cache application, the packages are GTG for David.

Please somebody upload the three packages  (Prev, Curr and Test) to
cygwin servers.  The package URL that I send in my previous email
were:

wget http://downloads.sourceforge.net/project/cygvarnish/cygwin-varnish%20package/varnish-2.1.2-5-src.tar.bz2
wget http://downloads.sourceforge.net/project/cygvarnish/cygwin-varnish%20package/varnish-2.1.2-5.tar.bz2
wget http://downloads.sourceforge.net/project/cygvarnish/cygwin-varnish%20package/varnish-2.1.4-5-src.tar.bz2
wget http://downloads.sourceforge.net/project/cygvarnish/cygwin-varnish%20package/varnish-2.1.4-5.tar.bz2
wget http://downloads.sourceforge.net/project/cygvarnish/cygwin-varnish%20package/varnish-r5665-5-src.tar.bz2
wget http://downloads.sourceforge.net/project/cygvarnish/cygwin-varnish%20package/varnish-r5665-5.tar.bz2
wget http://downloads.sourceforge.net/project/cygvarnish/cygwin-varnish%20package/setup.hint


By the way, if somebody has a web server in a cygwin enviroment and
want to try "varnish cache", feel free to send me an email.



2011/1/11 David Sastre:
> 2011/1/11, jdzstz - gmail dot com :
>> 2011/1/11 David Sastre :
>>> 2011/1/11, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 07:23:45AM +0100, David Sastre wrote:
>>>>>On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 07:57:23PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 08:34:03PM +0100, David Sastre wrote:
>>>>>> >OK. Please bump the cygwin package release number when you do that.
>>>>>> Why bump the package release on something that has never been released?
>>>>>> I think it makes sense that the first release should be -1.
>>>>>
>>>>>That's what I understand from:
>>>>>
>>>>>2.?Do increase the version number no matter what (if upstream
>>>>>version didn't change, bump the Cygwin release number): even if the
>>>>>package was bad, even if it was removed from the server for
>>>>>a security issue, even if has only been discussed in mailing
>>>>>list and never uploaded: it costs nothing and avoids confusion
>>>>>in both setup.exe and people mind.
>>>>
>>>> The package was never on the server, i.e., it was never released. ?If
>>>> a package ever touches cygwin.com then, yes, you have to bump the
>>>> version any time you make any change no matter how tiny.
>>>>
>>>> I don't care if the package is released with -57 release number but I
>>>> don't want it to get into the common knowledge pool that it is a
>>>> requirement because it isn't.
>>>
>>> Duly noted. Thanks for the clarification.
>>>
>> Do you want to renumber the packages to varnish-xxx-1 ?or ?I keep
>> actual name "varnish-xxx-5"??
>>
>> The only problem with rename is that old messages in cygwin-apps
>> mailist can confuse in the future.
>
> Let's keep it. Thanks.
>