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: New code goes into trunk
Date Sun, 13 Jun 2010 21:12:21 GMT
On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 12:25 PM, Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On 5 Jun 2010, at 23:45, J Chris Anderson wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jun 5, 2010, at 12:44 PM, Adam Kocoloski wrote:
>>
>>> I've only been merging bugfixes into 0.11.x for a long time now.  I think I
committed a number of things into trunk related to JIRA tickets with a Fix Version of 1.1.
>>>
>>
>> I've been reviewing the diff between trunk and 0.11.x -- I can't find anything that
shows up in the diff that shouldn't be in 1.0. I'm happy to recommend that we cut 1.0 from
trunk.
>>
>> I'd like it if others could repeat the exercise and see if they agree with me. There
are some things that cover a lot of code (the couch_util:get_value patch and the base64 changes,
for instance) which aren't at risk of creating bugs and will only make it harder to backport
to 1.0 if we don't put them in the 1.0 release.
>>
>> I don't have much opinion about what should go into 0.11.x from trunk, but that's
a different topic.
>
> I got it all solved and have 0.11.x merged up all right.
>
> In the process I found I had a faulty backport in there.
>
> See my work here: http://github.com/janl/couchdb/tree/0.11.x-monster-fix
>
> This is mostly reverting and reapplying in correct order patches to trunk into 0.11.x.
>
> I'm happy to commit that as soon as I get a green light.
>
> While going through all the commits, there are  a few more where I agree with Chris
that I'd like to backport before branching 1.0 from 0.11.x but I think we should go ahead
as planned and branch 1.0.x from 0.11.x.
>
> trunk will then be 1.1.x.
>
> Go?
>
> Cheers
> Jan
> --
>

Patch set looks good to me. Its a 0.11.x fast forward and everything
that was reverted was reapplied.

Good work tracking that down Jan.

Paul

Mime
View raw message