I support the committing of this patch again, for exactly the same
reasons as the previous two JIRAs.
Regards,
Oliver
Sian January wrote:
Hello,
Will any committer support another check-in for policytool on the same
basis as HARMONY-5944 and HARMONY-5927?
Thanks,
Sian
On 12/08/2008, Sian January <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thanks Oliver - I've committed it at r685108.
Sian
On 12/08/2008, Oliver Deakin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Sian,
I support applying this patch. It should not alter the stability of the
current code base as it is an incomplete tool and a timely commit is
important to close out this GSoC project.
Regards,
Oliver
Sian January wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'd like to commit another patch for policytool. As Oliver mentioned
previously, the tool is incomplete and has no impact on the rest of the
Harmony code base. Also it's the last week of GSoC this week so it
would be
helpful to András if we can check it in so he can complete his project.
Is
there another commiter who will support this?
Thanks,
Sian
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Oliver Deakin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 4 Aug 2008 15:58
Subject: Re: [tools] Ok to commit HARMONY-5927?
To: [email protected]
Thanks Mark - I have applied the patch at repo revision r682413.
Regards,
Oliver
Mark Hindess wrote:
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Oliver
Deakin writes:
Hi all,
Since we're in stability phase, I'm writing to request committer
support
for committing the patch supplied in HARMONY-5927. It is a patch for
policytool - since this tool is incomplete, I do not think this
patch will
cause us any instability for our milestone build. I do not feel that
this
patch needs to be included in the milestone build - i.e. we can keep
the
milestone at r681495 unless other important patches are applied - as
it is
part of an incomplete tool. I do feel, however, that it would be
useful for
András' progress if we could apply this patch to the repository now.
Any committers support/object to this patch being applied?
+1
As you say, there is no need to include this in M7. However, if we
end
up committing other changes for the M7 then there is no real harm in
including this change. So, I see no reason to hold it back.
Regards,
Mark.
--
Oliver Deakin
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
--
Oliver Deakin
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
