Thanks Robert, Benoit! Our somewhat unwritten policy is definitely to try hard to push changes upstream.
Cheers Jan -- On Nov 10, 2012, at 12:15 , Bob Dionne <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Nov 10, 2012, at 6:16 AM, Benoit Chesneau <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Bob Dionne <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hi Benoit, >>> >>> I made that ibrowse commit. I'm not sure what the process is with respect >>> to pushing this upstream. At Cloudant we maintain a fork of ibrowse that >>> also seems to track couchdb changes to ibrowse as well. I'm happy to handle >>> it however you see fit. >>> >>> I think this is where the rebar component based approach works well. It >>> enables independent development of the components. Switching to a newer >>> version is just changing a line in rebar.config >>> >> >> I agree, this is the best way to handle that for temporary changes. >> But we should also send the patch upstream so it can be integrated. > > Ok, I'll submit a pull request. This change was just an upgrade to use some > new BIFs so they may not be accepted if support for older erlang versions is > still required > > > >> If >> we don't we will have to manage our own fork and upgrades from >> upstream may be difficult at some point. >> >> btw are the cloudant for ibrowse (& mochiweb?) in sync with current >> version in couch? If yes I could probably use them as a temporary >> solution as well. >> >> - benoît >> >
