On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 8:02 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> On 15/05/2013 Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>
>> On 5/15/13 1:56 AM, Andrew Rist wrote:
>>
>>> Linux32 bots are waiting on infra to recreate the linux32 - we've asked
>>> them to create a CentOS 5 32bit bot (say that 5 times fast) Once we have
>>>
On 15/05/2013 Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
On 5/15/13 1:56 AM, Andrew Rist wrote:
Linux32 bots are waiting on infra to recreate the linux32 - we've asked
them to create a CentOS 5 32bit bot (say that 5 times fast) Once we have
that, we should be able to produce the correct set of bits for linux
platfor
On 5/15/13 1:56 AM, Andrew Rist wrote:
>
> On 5/13/2013 8:42 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:
>> Hi Stuart,
>>
>> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 01:16:55AM +, V Stuart Foote wrote:
>>> Sorry for the cross post, but this rubs on both the QA and Dev sides
>>> of the project.
>>>
>>> So, I understand th
On 5/13/2013 8:42 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:
Hi Stuart,
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 01:16:55AM +, V Stuart Foote wrote:
Sorry for the cross post, but this rubs on both the QA and Dev sides
of the project.
So, I understand that we are mid-way through, a full regression
testing of the 4.0
Hi Stuart,
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 01:16:55AM +, V Stuart Foote wrote:
> Sorry for the cross post, but this rubs on both the QA and Dev sides
> of the project.
>
> So, I understand that we are mid-way through, a full regression
> testing of the 4.0 branch at Rev 1478648. But has the project a
Sorry for the cross post, but this rubs on both the QA and Dev sides of the
project.
So, I understand that we are mid-way through, a full regression testing of the
4.0 branch at Rev 1478648. But has the project actively stopped the building of
dailys, and have the cognizant developers been aske
