On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Paul Poulain <[email protected]> wrote: > Le 23/05/2011 14:48, Chris Nighswonger a écrit : >> So my vote is to use this method unless there is a very compelling >> reason to do otherwise. > What's happening with > > http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=6328 (see comment 20)
So should I assume that "does not apply cleanly" in this case is due to the 'XXX' in the version number? If so, as I said, that is a 30 to 60 second fix. But without looking into it further, I'd guess that there were other problems with this patch set which caused it not to apply cleanly and that the DB version number was still only a less than one minute fix with the "other problems" (unrelated to the DB version number) being the real time consumer. > > is interesting. I think the idea of atomic updates is very interesting. And > the workflow/wiki must be updated anyway ! I agree that the wiki needs to speak with one tongue regarding whatever work flow is decided upon. :-) Kind Regards, Chris _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
