WLBL code currently committed in trunk seems fully functional to me and I
cannot spot any issues.
I am currently running trunk r1900387 on a server and r1899446 on all other
servers.
Just updated to rc1 most servers without issues so far.
kb@ told me that he has better code for
It's not a commit war. I rescind my request to go away from rtc. I will
work to see what we can escalate on the known issues.
On Sat, Apr 30, 2022, 19:04 Sidney Markowitz wrote:
> This is wrong, from the point of view of proper process.
>
> I'm glad you are accepting "fault", Kevin, "for not
This is wrong, from the point of view of proper process.
I'm glad you are accepting "fault", Kevin, "for not being more
communicative", but the process is that we have issues that are opened
in Bugzilla, work on them is coordinated in the comments of those
issues, issues that we decide to
I don't understand what you refer to with different ways? There's commands
and functions that can be renamed in only one way. What is the current
trunk lacking compared to your patch?
On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 12:39:43PM -0400, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> The switch to making sure that the
The switch to making sure that the patches were without any issues led to
significant delays.
To my knowledge there is nobody testing the code in any live production
systems. I expect we will find bugs because of that.
As I said the fault is mine for not being more communicative. But yes right
Why are you expecting massive issues? I completed all the WLBL work in few
days in meticulous detail, there's extensive tests and many people tested
it. I think there was about one alias that was missing which Giovanni
noticed (cheers).
I would have rather not participated, but as you went
Well it was out fault for working on diffs and not giving visibility.
Others then did work on some of the same bugs in a new branch.
We are reconciling it against the same work others did on the WLBL, for
example. And I expect with RC1 to find some pretty massive issues there
since I don't think
Wtf? If you or someone have "giant diffs" or work being done, then post
them on the appropriate bugs, reopening if necessary. I don't understand
why even waste time posting something vague like this.
On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 09:50:15AM -0400, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> Should we delay RTC? I
Should we delay RTC? I know there are some bugs being worked on in some of
the bugs that have been closed. I also know there's some patches that
Giovanni might or might not have gotten to for the WLBL. We had a giant
diff for that was collided.
On Sat, Apr 30, 2022, 05:55 Axb wrote:
> Doh!
Doh! Henrik already did it.
Thanks!
On 4/30/22 11:52, Axb wrote:
Should we update 20_aux_tlds.cf for this relesase?
I can't do it at the moment - any taker?
On 4/30/22 11:27, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
It's time for a code freeze in preparation for the release of 4.0.0
release candidates.
Should we update 20_aux_tlds.cf for this relesase?
I can't do it at the moment - any taker?
On 4/30/22 11:27, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
It's time for a code freeze in preparation for the release of 4.0.0
release candidates.
Please do not commit anything to trunk other than the usual ongoing
It's time for a code freeze in preparation for the release of 4.0.0
release candidates.
Please do not commit anything to trunk other than the usual ongoing
rules stuff that finds its way into the rule update process.
Any new bug fixes that need to be committed for 4.0.0 should be
associated
12 matches
Mail list logo
