Mailing-List: contact dev-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@couchdb.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.0.3 Release
From: Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <A083E3E7-8D60-4731-8295-6364C0E07D8F@apache.org>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 18:19:42 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <69412B34-7CF5-46B8-A9FB-AF4DE6D923D5@apache.org>
References: <BANLkTinnb71wsHmX9y5eNPSdzd=tz77ifQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1F84F64A-093C-47D3-9732-FED68DC2F025@googlemail.com>
 <0DA7F2FC-99AA-4904-A04E-14DB9FC4B32C@apache.org>
 <DF7B2924-D765-4D3E-8E5B-B439D3FF722F@googlemail.com>
 <A083E3E7-8D60-4731-8295-6364C0E07D8F@apache.org>
To: dev@couchdb.apache.org


On 28 Jun 2011, at 18:11, Noah Slater wrote:

>=20
> On 28 Jun 2011, at 17:09, Sebastian Cohnen wrote:
>=20
>>> Perhaps there is some good reason for them failing?
>>=20
>> I was not aware that the javascript CLI tests are "officially" ready =
to use yet. In that case it's definitely not okay if they are failing =
and since others have seen the same failing tests, I'd change my vote to =
=E2=88=921.
>=20
> If they are not ready to use yet, that is a good reason for them =
failing. If they should be part of the test procedure, then they should =
a) pass and b) be added to the wiki. Sorry for being so ARGH about it, =
but I like to run a tight ship, so we should get clarification on this =
either way. Thanks!

It's all good Noah, I'm 100% behind you here :)

Sebastian, sorry, I didn't see you were running the still experimental =
CLI tests.

Cheers
Jan
--=20