Ok, I'll spin up an RC shortly.
On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com>
> On 29 April 2015 at 17:38, Gordon Sim <g...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On 04/27/2015 01:45 PM, Gordon Sim wrote:
> >> On 04/27/2015 01:14 PM, Rafael Schloming wrote:
> >>> I also added PROTON-858 as a release blocker.
> >> I've been trying to get a fix proposal together for that. I'll post it
> >> for review as soon as I'm reasonably confident, still seeing some issues
> >> at present (not 100% sure they are related, but am assuming so).
> > Just to update the status here. Although I have positive reviews for the
> > simple patch, I have encountered some issues even with that during stress
> > testing.
> > I can't say for sure whether these are caused by my change as the test
> > showing them up doesn't run long enough without the change. However
> until I
> > know for sure I am not keen to commit it.
> > If this is holding up things for the proton-j side, which after all is
> > motivated the release in the first place, I would suggest we continue
> > without the fix for PROTON-858.
> I think that might be a good idea, certainly I wont argue against it.
> If we arent confident in the fix, we might end up needing a respin
> that could push things out further.
> At the end of the day, we can easily do a 0.9.2 when we think it is
> ready. Its possibly also worth saying that even if we didnt do that,
> its likely less of an issue for folks using proton-c to just patch the
> source they build from, whereas many using proton-j will be doing so
> via binaries at maven central and so need us to push a release out to
> get the changes.