couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Klaus Trainer <klaus_trai...@posteo.de>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.1.1 Release
Date Thu, 20 Oct 2011 20:51:55 GMT
Hehe, given the fact that the voting round has been aborted, I thought
it would be clear that it relates to your most recent reply ;)

Sorry, I've missed that the respective thread for that topic (i.e.,
"futon tests") had grown meanwhile. I should have better replied on that
one.

- K


On Thu, 2011-10-20 at 21:38 +0100, Robert Newson wrote:
> What is that -1 related to?
> 
> On 20 October 2011 21:36, Klaus Trainer <klaus_trainer@posteo.de> wrote:
> > -1
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 2011-10-20 at 18:57 +0100, Robert Newson wrote:
> >> Too late.
> >>
> >> I'm inclined to work with Paul Davis and make 1.1.1 the last time that
> >> there *is* a Futon test suite.
> >>
> >> B.
> >>
> >> On 20 October 2011 18:54, J. Lee Coltrane <lee@projectmastermind.com>
wrote:
> >> >
> >> > FWIW, the patch attached to COUCHDB-1310
> >> >  (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-1310)
> >> >
> >> > will fix a great many (all, afaik) of the futon test "hangs" (the cases
where
> >> > the tests get "stuck", and never complete).  Without this patch, I was
> >> > never able to get a complete run through the browser tests in 1.1.1 RC1.
> >> > With the patch, I still get test failures, but at least I can get through
all the
> >> > tests without restarting the browser.
> >> >
> >> > The patch is tiny -- it just swaps the order of two lines of code, in the
> >> > '/_restart' handler, so that the http response gets written *before* the
server
> >> > is restarted (rather than after).
> >> >
> >> > As test instability continues to be a hot topic, maybe this patch is worth
> >> > considering for inclusion in the next 1.1.1 RC?
> >> >
> >> > -Lee
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Oct 20, 2011, at 12:25 PM, Benoit Chesneau wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 6:23 PM, Robert Newson <rnewson@apache.org>
wrote:
> >> >>> Hi All,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Thanks for all the responses so far. Unfortunately I am aborting
this round.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> It turns out there is a serious bug in this 1.1.1 candidate when
using
> >> >>> SpiderMonkey 1.7.0. Instead of sealing the 'doc' parameter to views,
> >> >>> we seal the object that defines the seal function, which then causes
> >> >>> all kinds of 'X is read-only' events.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> It's a one word fix, so a new 1.1.1 candidate will be out very
soon,
> >> >>> and it should not invalidate any of these results.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> B.
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >> :(
> >> >>
> >> >> It would worth to look at this erlang warning too imo. Hopefully i
> >> >> will have some wifi at the hotel tonight.I will see if I can make it.
> >> >>
> >> >> - benoit
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> >


Mime
View raw message