couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul Davis <paul.joseph.da...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Release 0.9.1
Date Tue, 05 May 2009 14:36:45 GMT
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 10:30 AM, Chris Anderson <jchris@apache.org> wrote:
> On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 5:16 AM, Paul Davis <paul.joseph.davis@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Noah Slater wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 11:57:43PM -0400, Paul Davis wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> That said, what keeps us from 0.10? I did contemplate the the jump from
>>>> 0.9 isn't as big as the jump from 0.8. Though, I would probably say that
>>>> the jump from 0.8 to 0.9 was fairly delayed. At the moment there are at
>>>> least three new features: config.d updates, bulk=ok, and the reduce
>>>> warnings; none of which seem like only a $(REVISON) change. To me that
>>>> doesn't seem like something to ignore but I would be perfectly happy
>>>> referring to version numbers via subversion revision so I'm a bit not
>>>> normal on that front.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Just to be clear, my configuration changes were not merged back.
>>>
>>> What changes, specifically, do you think should be pulled from the 0.9.x
>>> branch?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I haven't the slightest cause I have no idea what the guidelines are.
>>
>
> I'm pretty sure the guidelines are: in the 0.9.x branch, fix bugs,
> don't change behavior in a way that would break clients.
>
> Bad candidates for 0.9.x: the reduce_limit patch I just applied to
> trunk, changes in query-string validation, totally new features like
> batch=ok
>
> Good candidates for 0.9.x: reduce sparseness in db files, make
> replication more complete/reliable, fix arbitrary resource limits
> (like the 100+ open dbs bug)
>
> I think that's pretty clear, but don't hesitate to ask if it could be
> more clear.
>
> Chris
>
> --
> Chris Anderson
> http://jchrisa.net
> http://couch.io
>

Sounds good. I'll have to figure out how to un-merge a couple patches
to 0.9.x then because I definitely pushed a couple that would break
client code relying on some of the different parameters being silently
ignored.

Anyone have any idea on how one does that in SVN?

Paul

Mime
View raw message