Ok, I'll check it in early next week.
Thanks,
~morgen
On May 25, 2007, at 11:14 AM, Jared Rhine wrote:
Morgen, there are no remaining objections to proceeding with your
handy-dandy default-less accounts patch. Feel free to check in
anytime, as far as I'm concerned. I look forward to it :)
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Migration checkpoint update
Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 14:04:47 -0700
From: Jared Rhine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
An update on the DAV->EIM migration status and checkpoint.
I have a number of instruction comments to integrate; thanks everyone
for their feedback.
The last collaborative QA session determined that alpha 4 users
weren't
supported properly (Davor found this). That's been fixed, so we
need to
use a subsequent checkpoint to support alpha 4 user migration.
Since lots of fixes have gotten incorporated since the 20070518, our
divergence (between 20070518 and trunk) is pretty large and we'll need
to do basic retesting for migration. I was wondering if as long as
we're doing that, we might agree that we should let Morgen go ahead
and
check in the "default-less accounts" patch he's held off on for us (to
minimize churn).
There's a risk in incorporating that feature, mainly just the
possibility of "unintended consequences", but if we're all up for
it, I
think the time pressure if off enough to allow for the couple of extra
days of dealing with retesting.
So proposed: have Morgen check in the "default-less account" features,
test its impact on migration in trunk, and pick a post-integration
checkpoint as our suggested migration checkpoint.
-- Jared
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "chandler-dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chandler-dev
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "chandler-dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chandler-dev
