On 23 Sep 2014, at 09:32, Marcus Denker <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 23 Sep 2014, at 00:50, Martin McClure <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 09/22/2014 09:50 AM, Marcus Denker wrote: >>> >>> On 22 Sep 2014, at 17:05, Martin McClure <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> This fix required multiple slices since loading things in the wrong order >>>> broke exceptions badly enough to hang the system. I packaged things in >>>> five slices. (It's possible that if Monticello was smart enough I could >>>> have done it in less than five, but it did need more than one). >>>> >>>> The automatic test runner seems to only load the first of the five slices. >>>> Therefore two exception tests fail, which is expected. All exception tests >>>> should pass after all five slices are loaded in order. >>>> >>>> Is there a way to tell the automatic test runner to load all five, or does >>>> this one require manual testing? (I did test it manually before dropping >>>> the slices in the inbox, but that was a month ago.) >>> >>> Maybe for a complex change like that we should sync off list… the normal >>> machinery is good for normal stuff, everything else needs exceptional work. >>> (e.g. we could load changesets, could be simpler than using monticello) >> >> OK, let me know how you want to proceed. If you load the five slices from >> the inbox, in sequence > > Looks good! Last time I merged I got strange conflicts, but now everything > looks fine. > > I will integrate all this with 5 updates later today. > All are in 20243-40246 Marcus
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
