why 1.2?
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 11:27 PM, Noah Slater <[email protected]> wrote: > Shouldn't this be 1.2? > > On 15 Sep 2010, at 21:51, Robert Newson wrote: > >> All, >> >> I figured I'd start the thread as I have some cool stuff in trunk that >> I'd like to see in a release one of these days. >> >> What should be in 1.1? When should we release it? >> >> FYI: I've added three things I think are important for 1.1; >> >> 1) support for the Range header for uncompressed attachments. >> 2) HTTPS support for the couchdb daemon. >> 3) _sum now supports an array of numbers. >> >> I believe there's at least one important fix needed for 1.1; >> >> 1) The replicator allows ssl connections to hosts with self-signed >> certificates by default, obviating the security of the protocol. Since >> this is the OTP default (seriously), we probably want to get a patch >> upstream as well. >> >> B. > >
