On 22.10.2015 01:28, Gabe Alford wrote:
Thanks Martin^2. Updated patched attached.
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 2:46 AM, Martin Basti > wrote:
On 20.10.2015 05:17, Gabe Alford wrote:
Bump for re-review.
Hello,
thank your for
Thanks Martin^2. Updated patched attached.
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 2:46 AM, Martin Basti wrote:
>
>
> On 20.10.2015 05:17, Gabe Alford wrote:
>
> Bump for re-review.
>
>
> Hello,
>
> thank your for your patch, the patch LGTM, but please use print() as
> function to be
On 20.10.2015 05:17, Gabe Alford wrote:
Bump for re-review.
Hello,
thank your for your patch, the patch LGTM, but please use print() as
function to be python2/3 compatible
Martin^2
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 7:15 AM, Gabe Alford >
Bump for re-review.
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 7:15 AM, Gabe Alford wrote:
> No worries Petr. All a part of the review process.
>
> I have attached an updated patch that prints only a warning message.
>
> thanks,
>
> Gabe
>
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 12:39 AM, Petr Spacek
Hi,
I don't think this is the correct approach. We are aiming to have
idempotent installers, which means that running uninstall on a system
without IPA installed should be a no-op. This is the current behavior,
so your patch is actually moving us back.
The proper fix would be to *remove*
Hello Gabe,
I would like to apologize for the confusion regarding this patch and the
repeated reworking.
Unfortunately Honza's position is not mentioned in the ticket so you could not
know what to do, but Honza is our "installer architect" so he has final say.
Petr^2 Spacek
On 13.10.2015
No worries Petr. All a part of the review process.
I have attached an updated patch that prints only a warning message.
thanks,
Gabe
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 12:39 AM, Petr Spacek wrote:
> Hello Gabe,
>
> I would like to apologize for the confusion regarding this patch and
Hello Gabe,
thank you for your patch!
Please note that there might be a case where detection is_ipa_configured() is
broken but the user still needs to run the uninstall process to clean it up.
Could you amend the patch to respect --force option? In that case the
detection should be skipped.