Thanks! On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Jan Lehnardt <j...@apache.org> wrote:
> > On Mar 3, 2012, at 00:31 , Jan Lehnardt wrote: > > > Good catch, will do in the morning. > > Done. > > > > > Cheers > > Jan > > -- > > > > On 02.03.2012, at 20:00, Noah Slater <nsla...@tumbolia.org> wrote: > > > >> Have you updated NEWS and CHANGES? > >> > >> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Jan Lehnardt <j...@apache.org> wrote: > >> > >>> > >>> On Mar 2, 2012, at 17:28 , Noah Slater wrote: > >>> > >>>> Vote aborted. Thanks to everyone who took part. > >>>> > >>>> Five people have claimed ownership of the five remaining tasks: > >>>> > >>>> * Bob Dionne will driving COUCHDB-1424 > >>>> * Benoît Chesneau will be driving COUCHDB-1426 > >>>> * Jan Lehnardt will be driving the R15B patch > >>> > >>> √ > >>> > >>> > http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=couchdb.git;a=commit;h=776aa1d0 > >>> > >>> Landed in both 1.2.x and master. Thanks to Paul Davis for coming up > with > >>> the more canonical C version. > >>> > >>> Cheers > >>> Jan > >>> -- > >>> > >>>> * Robert Newson will be driving the performance work > >>>> * I will be driving round three, obviously > >>>> > >>>> Let's kick some ass! > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Robert Newson <rnew...@apache.org> > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> +1. Abort this, get the fixes we have in and start round 3. The > >>>>> performance regression issue is elusive, we might, out of necessity, > >>>>> have to defer action on that until post 1.2.0. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On 2 March 2012 16:02, Noah Slater <nsla...@tumbolia.org> wrote: > >>>>>> I think we should, at a minimum: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> * Abort this round > >>>>>> * Land the R15B patch > >>>>>> * Land COUCHDB-1426 (which seems easy) > >>>>>> * Start round three > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I think we should try to: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> * Try to land COUCHDB-1424 > >>>>>> * Get clarification on the performance issues > >>>>>> > >>>>>> For these last two items, I think we should impose a time limit. > Let's > >>>>> say > >>>>>> a week. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I think we should also form some teams, to see if we can do some > >>> sprints > >>>>> to > >>>>>> get these issues fixed. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Jan Lehnardt <j...@apache.org> > wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Mar 2, 2012, at 16:47 , Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 16:29, Jan Lehnardt <j...@apache.org> > wrote: > >>>>>>>>> Proposed Action: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I'd propose to release 1.2.0 as-is with the following points > >>>>> mentioned > >>>>>>>>> in the release notes (the exact wording of which is to be done): > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> 1. Note that this release is incompatible with Erlang R15B. A > patch > >>>>> is > >>>>>>>>> available at [LINK to DIFF]; it will appear in Apache CouchDB > 1.2.1. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> 2. Also note that there are some reports of a performance > regression > >>>>> in > >>>>>>>>> view building. While initial and ad-hoc tests showed an > improvement > >>>>> in > >>>>>>>>> most cases, we'd like to ask our users to report any significant > >>>>>>>>> differences to the Apache CouchDB 1.1.1 release. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> While I am usually cheering on the release process, taken > together it > >>>>>>>> seems more prudent to abort this round, take the R15B driver and > the > >>>>>>>> 142{4,6} patches and then starting a new round. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I'd agree if 142{4,6} were decided tickets, but they are still > ongoing > >>>>>>> and potentially, in the 24-case especially, for a while. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Cheers > >>>>>>> Jan > >>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>> > >
