On 5/8/08, Sian January <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ok - that sounds fine to me. Should I check in a commented-out test so we > can get a clean test run, or just leave it as is? >
I'd leave it as is. -Stepan. > On 08/05/2008, Stepan Mishura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On 5/8/08, Sian January <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I've just noticed there's a pack200 test failing, both on my machine and > > on > > > the build machine. I'd like to check in a fix - it should be fairly low > > > risk as none of the other modules depend on pack200. Does that sound ok? > > > > > > > I assume that the risk is low but I expect that the issue is not > > critical. So I'd suggest waiting till the end of test results > > evaluation. If there are other issues for fixing/committing then I > > think it is OK to commit the fix for pack200 and repeat full testing > > again. Otherwise, I'd release r653525 as M6 without the fix for > > pack200 - IMHO one not critical issue shouldn't hold M6 milestone > > release. > > > > Thanks, > > Stepan. > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Sian > > > > > > -- > > > Unless stated otherwise above: > > > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number > > > 741598. > > > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 > > 3AU > > > > > > > > > -- > Unless stated otherwise above: > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number > 741598. > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU >
