On 03/01/2018 05:01 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Am 28.02.2018 um 20:14 hat John Snow geschrieben:
>>
>>
>> On 02/28/2018 01:15 PM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
>>> Is it because you want to avoid that the user picks an automatic job for
>>> completing the mixed transaction?
>>
>> I wanted to avoid the case
Am 28.02.2018 um 20:14 hat John Snow geschrieben:
>
>
> On 02/28/2018 01:15 PM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> > Is it because you want to avoid that the user picks an automatic job for
> > completing the mixed transaction?
>
> I wanted to avoid the case that a job without the manual property would
> be
On 02/28/2018 01:15 PM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Is it because you want to avoid that the user picks an automatic job for
> completing the mixed transaction?
I wanted to avoid the case that a job without the manual property would
be stuck "pending" -- which I have defined to mean that it is waiting
Am 24.02.2018 um 00:51 hat John Snow geschrieben:
> Instead of automatically transitioning from PENDING to CONCLUDED, gate
> the .prepare() and .commit() phases behind an explicit acknowledgement
> provided by the QMP monitor if manual completion mode has been requested.
>
> This allows us to
On 02/23/2018 05:51 PM, John Snow wrote:
Instead of automatically transitioning from PENDING to CONCLUDED, gate
the .prepare() and .commit() phases behind an explicit acknowledgement
provided by the QMP monitor if manual completion mode has been requested.
This allows us to perform graph
Instead of automatically transitioning from PENDING to CONCLUDED, gate
the .prepare() and .commit() phases behind an explicit acknowledgement
provided by the QMP monitor if manual completion mode has been requested.
This allows us to perform graph changes in prepare and/or commit so that
graph
