On 28 Jan 2014, at 00:18, Sven Van Caekenberghe <s...@stfx.eu> wrote:
> OK, I will try and trust you and Sean. Well, it is in 30 726, but there are 2 regressions found: ReleaseTests.ReleaseTest.testObsoleteClasses ReleaseTests.ReleaseTest.testUnknownProcesses on all 3 platforms, these might be transient, but with all the renaming something could have gone wrong.... > On 28 Jan 2014, at 00:13, Benjamin <benjamin.vanryseghem.ph...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On 27 Jan 2014, at 20:08, Sven Van Caekenberghe <s...@stfx.eu> wrote: >>> Are the compatible ? >>> Does one have to come before the other ? >>> Are they both needed ? >> >> I think we should drop >>> https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/12717/ReactiveVariable-NewValueHolder >> >> and integrate >>> https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/12684/NewValueHolder-Enhancements >> >> For at least two reasons: >> - I added hooks for Spec to continue working with the slice I proposed >> (otherwise no more Spec fix until the release) >> - I do not have to review it :P >> >> Ok maybe the second point is not that relevant LOL >> Just that I am sure that the fix I proposed works well with Spec. >> And I an pretty sure the other will break it :) >> >> I was not aware of another case related to this. >> It is not flagged Spec nor my name, so there is no way for me to guess it >> exists. >> >> Ben >
