Re: [darcs-devel] [issue659] Release Darcs 2.0
Mark Stosberg wrote: Here's the report I made for the Darcs 2 release-critical issues. I used the feature to save it so it appears in Your Queries in the sidebar. It shows that 2 of the 7 items on the list are resolved now. http://bugs.darcs.net/[EMAIL PROTECTED],id,activity,status,assignedto@sort=status@group=priority@filter=topic@pagesize=50@startwith=0topic=24@dispname=Fix%20For%20Darcs%202.0 How about 699? Unless I'm doing something completely bogus (don't think so), darcs2 has developed a new performance problem recently. What's the status of the bytestring support? I believe it has a nasty problem with filenames containing spaces, but I'm stuck testing that due to issue 699. Maybe if someone has a spare moment they could play around with some filenames with spaces in and see if they can provoke any problems - just a 'darcs check' was enough to show a problem for me, and 'darcs repair' left me with a corrupt repository. Cheers, Simon ___ darcs-devel mailing list darcs-devel@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-devel
[darcs-devel] [issue659] Release Darcs 2.0
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 10:57:55AM +, Simon Marlow wrote: Mark Stosberg wrote: Here's the report I made for the Darcs 2 release-critical issues. I used the feature to save it so it appears in Your Queries in the sidebar. It shows that 2 of the 7 items on the list are resolved now. http://bugs.darcs.net/[EMAIL PROTECTED],id,activity,status,assignedto@sort=status@group=priority@filter=topic@pagesize=50@startwith=0topic=24@dispname=Fix%20For%20Darcs%202.0 How about 699? Unless I'm doing something completely bogus (don't think so), darcs2 has developed a new performance problem recently. That's an important one. I've been stalled for a couple of days trying to fix 672 (the one where I get the weird ExitFailure 127 from runProcess), which is also release-critical. What's the status of the bytestring support? I believe it has a nasty problem with filenames containing spaces, but I'm stuck testing that due to issue 699. Maybe if someone has a spare moment they could play around with some filenames with spaces in and see if they can provoke any problems - just a 'darcs check' was enough to show a problem for me, and 'darcs repair' left me with a corrupt repository. I haven't tried bytestring support myself. For now, I'm leaving that for others to test and debug, since I've got more bug reports than I can handle apart from that feature (which could always be disabled). -- David Roundy Department of Physics Oregon State University __ Darcs bug tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bugs.darcs.net/issue659 __ ___ darcs-devel mailing list darcs-devel@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-devel
[darcs-devel] [issue659] Release Darcs 2.0
How about 699 [darcs2 cannot check the ghc-darcs repository] ? Unless I'm doing something completely bogus (don't think so), darcs2 has developed a new performance problem recently. In the sense that it looks like a regression, it's a candidate. Mark -- topic: +FixForDarcs20 -Darcs2 __ Darcs bug tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bugs.darcs.net/issue659 __ ___ darcs-devel mailing list darcs-devel@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-devel
[darcs-devel] [issue659] Release Darcs 2.0
David Roundy wrote: On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 03:42:42AM -, Mark Stosberg wrote: I decided I don't like using Superseder to track dependencies for release, because there's not way to see a report of all of these tickets, so we can easily review what they are, and what the status is. So instead I'm tagging all of the issues with the FixForDarcs20 tag, so we can make such a report. Okay. How about a simple ReleaseCritical tag, which we could reuse for later releases? In that case, we could add the Show release critical search to everyone's tracker view (and not feel that after release we need to remove it). I thought of that, but our Roundup has a limitation of only really being able to search for one Topic at a time. So while searching of ReleaseCritical and Darcs20 might be ideal, it isn't practical. I suppose ReleaseCritical would work as long as there was only one release being prepared at a time. Considering there are currently sort of two (1.1 and 2.0), this case may well come up again. I'm going to leave things alone for now with FixForDarcs20 in place, but if someone wants to change it further, I'll go along with it. Mark __ Darcs bug tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bugs.darcs.net/issue659 __ ___ darcs-devel mailing list darcs-devel@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-devel
[darcs-devel] [issue659] Release Darcs 2.0
I decided I don't like using Superseder to track dependencies for release, because there's not way to see a report of all of these tickets, so we can easily review what they are, and what the status is. So instead I'm tagging all of the issues with the FixForDarcs20 tag, so we can make such a report. -- superseder: -Darcs2: changes shows revised history, darcs apply = bus error, darcs-unstable (hashed) repo fails to push to empty repo, get leaves mystery rmfiles (old format), optimize --reorder = Failure commuting patches in commute_by called by gpit! (Darcs2), record = hash failure with pre-gzipped files, wrong report of Skipped 6 patches due to dependencies __ Darcs bug tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bugs.darcs.net/issue659 __ ___ darcs-devel mailing list darcs-devel@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-devel
[darcs-devel] [issue659] Release Darcs 2.0
I'm assigning this bug to myself, just so it's easier for me to see what's listed here. I appreciate the work you've been doing Mark on marking bugs as release-critical in this way. And would appreciate similar work by others! David -- assignedto: - droundy __ Darcs bug tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bugs.darcs.net/issue659 __ ___ darcs-devel mailing list darcs-devel@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-devel
[darcs-devel] [issue659] Release Darcs 2.0
Adding issue568 as a dependency. It's apparent regression in the unstable branch with the title of wrong report of Skipped 6 patches due to dependencies. -- superseder: +wrong report of Skipped 6 patches due to dependencies __ Darcs bug tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bugs.darcs.net/issue659 __ ___ darcs-devel mailing list darcs-devel@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-devel
Re: [darcs-devel] [issue659] Release Darcs 2.0
bugs: Adding new recommended dependency: disabling bytestring by default for now to avoid bus errors. bus errors using bytestring by default? Has the cause of this been identified? ___ darcs-devel mailing list darcs-devel@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-devel
[darcs-devel] [issue659] Release Darcs 2.0
Hi Don, bus errors using bytestring by default? Has the cause of this been identified? It's an error I got trying to apply a patch which was darcs sent from a Windows box http://bugs.darcs.net/issue697 The repository is the wxhaskell one (actually the patch has already been applied, so you'll have to unpull it to see this in action) -- nosy: +dons __ Darcs bug tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bugs.darcs.net/issue659 __ ___ darcs-devel mailing list darcs-devel@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-devel
[darcs-devel] [issue659] Release Darcs 2.0
Nominating bug with pre-gzipped files as something to look into before the Darcs 2 release. That's issue673. -- superseder: +hash failure with hashed and darcs-2 format __ Darcs bug tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bugs.darcs.net/issue659 __ ___ darcs-devel mailing list darcs-devel@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-devel
[darcs-devel] [issue659] Release Darcs 2.0
I'm nominating issue585 to be addressed for the Darcs 2 to be released. This is a bug in convert where flattening mergers changes the dependency structure and can make old tags inaccessible. -- superseder: +optimize --reorder = Failure commuting patches in commute_by called by gpit! (Darcs2) __ Darcs bug tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bugs.darcs.net/issue659 __ ___ darcs-devel mailing list darcs-devel@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-devel
[darcs-devel] [issue659] Release Darcs 2.0
I nominate issue579 to be fixed for the Darcs 2 release. The issue title is: Darcs2: changes shows revised history -- superseder: +Darcs2: changes shows revised history __ Darcs bug tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bugs.darcs.net/issue659 __ ___ darcs-devel mailing list darcs-devel@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-devel
Re: [darcs-devel] [issue659] Release Darcs 2.0
On Thu, Feb 07, 2008 at 05:56:52PM -, Mark Stosberg wrote: Based on the bug tracker activity, my sense is that Darcs 2 is already better than 1.0.9, with no significant regressions that I'm aware of. Another major regression is the slowdown of record when adding many files, which was recently reported (off bug-tracker) by Zooko. -- David Roundy Department of Physics Oregon State University ___ darcs-devel mailing list darcs-devel@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-devel
[darcs-devel] [issue659] Release Darcs 2.0
New submission from Mark Stosberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]: This ticket is created to track the release of Darcs 2.0. Other bugs or features that are blocking the release can associated as superceders. When those are all resolved, the release should happen. Based on the bug tracker activity, my sense is that Darcs 2 is already better than 1.0.9, with no significant regressions that I'm aware of. I'm adding issue648 as a superceder to start with, which refers to strange rmfile entries appearing in whatsnew after a pull. -- messages: 3204 nosy: beschmi, droundy, kowey, markstos, tommy priority: feature status: unread superseder: get leaves mystery rmfiles (old format) title: Release Darcs 2.0 __ Darcs bug tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bugs.darcs.net/issue659 __ ___ darcs-devel mailing list darcs-devel@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-devel
