Mailing-List: contact dev-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@couchdb.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of klimpong@gmail.com designates
 74.125.83.52 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:sender:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date
         :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
        b=th9F94Y0XzsCafNSjt/JM/ebW0GQXa2b6S48rfyIdfVgBhbOv8PGxIvH3P5mIh2Wmz
         8NuhtrkaEiLdALD7USGk7zXpqRSIS6H7KpLtb8ouG/RbCYCIJ3XM2JZ2edf+IGItU/O5
         c8KTSPPlbcU5sNfAD73fNBaf2aUURnRVWAg2Q=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: klimpong@gmail.com
Reply-To: till@php.net
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimvW+x65p2TUZWTxKZjxoV9hc09MhtS=7=yhyx5@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTikgihotg1USKzrhYRWnMZJQC5Q-oSGH8HU4c5Fg@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikGXysT_Zuz3FHU1jhTm_MUrV420Cc7MDkML6cs@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikfuSbSJtVoBScU+gkOH2ChjmNGDEVvP+bDUEMO@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimvW+x65p2TUZWTxKZjxoV9hc09MhtS=7=yhyx5@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 16:15:58 +0100
Message-ID: <AANLkTikx=mz7-FVtsVE6aAxxkEJNfu+d_XtDJpERMkLP@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Preparing 1.0.2 release.
From: till <till@php.net>
To: Benoit Chesneau <bchesneau@gmail.com>
Cc: dev@couchdb.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 3:19 PM, Benoit Chesneau <bchesneau@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 2:51 PM, Paul Davis <paul.joseph.davis@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 4:09 AM, till <till@php.net> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 1:30 AM, Paul Davis <paul.joseph.davis@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Anyone have an objection to me calling a 1.0.2 vote? Now that
>>>> COUCHDB-968 and COUCHDB-999 are fixed we have finished the blockers.
>>>> Though I now see that there's an issue [1] listed under 1.0.2 but I'm
>>>> inclined to just reassign it to 1.1.x.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-998
>>>>
>>>
>>> Just curious -- why is the patch attached not applied?
>>>
>>> Till
>>>
>>
>> I reckon it's because no one that knows JavaScript has reviewed it to
>> decide if it should be applied.
>>
>
> I answered to the ticket. If I read correctly the futon code, the
> patch is OK. Can't commit from this machine so I will let you do the
> final step :)
>
> - benoit
>

Thanks, Benoit!

Kind of related -- anyone remember the futon work Mikeal did. Whatever
happened to it? Does it address those issues as well?

I don't want to stall the release but is Mikeal's work more a 1.1.x feature?

Till