Re: Intent to backport OAK-6218

2017-10-12 Thread Matt Ryan 
+1 (nonbinding)


On October 10, 2017 at 9:23:26 AM, Chetan Mehrotra (
chetan.mehro...@gmail.com) wrote:

+1
Chetan Mehrotra


On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 8:22 AM, Julian Reschke 
wrote:
> On 2017-10-10 17:16, Marcel Reutegger wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'd like to backport OAK-6218 to the maintenance branches. It adds
>> additional information to a DocumentStoreException about IDs of affected
>> documents. As such it is not a bug fix, but very useful when analyzing
what
>> went wrong. I consider it a low risk change.
>
>
> +1
>

Re: Intent to backport OAK-6218

2017-10-10 Thread Chetan Mehrotra 
+1
Chetan Mehrotra


On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 8:22 AM, Julian Reschke  wrote:
> On 2017-10-10 17:16, Marcel Reutegger wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'd like to backport OAK-6218 to the maintenance branches. It adds
>> additional information to a DocumentStoreException about IDs of affected
>> documents. As such it is not a bug fix, but very useful when analyzing what
>> went wrong. I consider it a low risk change.
>
>
> +1
>

Re: Intent to backport OAK-6218

2017-10-10 Thread Julian Reschke 

On 2017-10-10 17:16, Marcel Reutegger wrote:

Hi,

I'd like to backport OAK-6218 to the maintenance branches. It adds additional 
information to a DocumentStoreException about IDs of affected documents. As 
such it is not a bug fix, but very useful when analyzing what went wrong. I 
consider it a low risk change.


+1

Intent to backport OAK-6218

2017-10-10 Thread Marcel Reutegger 
Hi,

I'd like to backport OAK-6218 to the maintenance branches. It adds additional 
information to a DocumentStoreException about IDs of affected documents. As 
such it is not a bug fix, but very useful when analyzing what went wrong. I 
consider it a low risk change.

Regards
 Marcel