couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Adam Kocoloski <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 0.9.1 release
Date Mon, 29 Jun 2009 23:34:53 GMT
I don't know if it's a regression. My logic was that we don't want to  
do a release that fails our own test suite. I think it will be less  
work down the line if we just fix it tonight.  Cheers,


Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 29, 2009, at 5:29 PM, Damien Katz <> wrote:

> Unless this is a regression, I think we shouldn't hold up 0.9.1 for  
> this. We can add the fix to the branch, and if we do a 0.9.2 it will  
> be there.
> -Damien
> On Jun 29, 2009, at 3:59 PM, Paul Davis wrote:
>> Like I said on the ticket, unless I'm mistaken, _restart only exists
>> for testing purposes. This fix is more about fixing the test so that
>> people aren't alarmed which to me doesn't change actual behavior as
>> most people shouldn't be hitting _restart outside of test suites.
>> As for the mechanics of doing a vote, I'd just wait for those that
>> expressed concern about the test case failing to verify that a new
>> 0.9.1 tarball doesn't fail and if so then move on with our lives.
>> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 3:50 PM, Noah Slater<>  
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 02:47:25PM -0400, Adam Kocoloski wrote:
>>>> We don't necessarily need to hold up 0.9.1 while we discuss the  
>>>> behavior
>>>> of /_restart, but I think it's very likely that the  
>>>> implementation of
>>>> /_restart will change substantially in the near future.  I would  
>>>> go so
>>>> far as to recommend that people not use the /_restart feature in  
>>>> 0.9.1
>>>> and below.  Best,
>>> Jan, Chris, Damien, Chris, Paul, everyone else? Thoughts?
>>> --
>>> Noah Slater,

View raw message