On 7/18/13, Olemis Lang <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 7/18/13, Ryan Ollos <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Olemis Lang <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> On 7/17/13, Matevž Bradač <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > On 17. Jul, 2013, at 22:37, Alexander Heusingfeld wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> +1 backward compatible bugfix releases should always have a minor
>>> version
>>> >> number
>>> >
>>> > +1, I'm also in favour of 0.6.1.
>>> >
>>>
>>> JFTR , the Bloodhound project does not adopt the semantic versioning
>>> [1]_ [2]_ . It should be ok to proceed with any of 0.6.1 or 0.7.0 ,
>>> even if 0.6.1 seems to be a logical choice (that I prefer) .
>>>
>>> .. [1] http://semver.org
>>>
>>> .. [2] http://markmail.org/message/pfjqchk47samthg5
>>>
>>
>> +1 Release a new bug fix release in the next few days.
>>
>> Thank you for starting this thread and giving the issue visibility.
>>
>> I've merged the two changesets associated with #592 into the 0.6 branch
>> so
>> that we can do some testing. I plan to do testing tomorrow. Please report
>> back if you've tested the changes for a particular configuration and can
>> confirm the issue is fixed on the 0.6 branch.
>>
>
> This is what I did after checking out 0.6 branch :
>
[...]
- Ran the unit test suite
* test report http://goo.gl/NI2Bf
* ... a few minor failures !
- Applied patches for #387 and ran the functional test suite
* test report http://goo.gl/ZwCla
* ... only expected failures
I pasted the details in the wrong place . Sorry
> Moreover blood-hound.net is running the code in /trunk and :
>
> - References to global: TracLinks are working as expected
> * e.g. in http://dataviz.blood-hound.net/wiki/UserDoc/TracLinks
> - URL generation for product: links is working fine too
> * e.g. in http://dataviz.blood-hound.net/wiki/UserDoc
>
> ... and finally considering feedback received in #594 it seems that
> SCRIPT_NAME issue will be gone after applying proposed patches (...
> though I think I'll write a functional test case for that ... but that
> may be scheduled as part of forthcoming milestones)
>
> IOW we should be really close to move forward with the release since a
> few minor failures are noticed beyond known pending failures / errors.
> We only have a few minor regressions .
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Olemis.
>
--
Regards,
Olemis.
