Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-couchdb-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7CA42FEC6 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 2013 14:34:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 50259 invoked by uid 500); 26 Mar 2013 14:34:51 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-dev-archive@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 50230 invoked by uid 500); 26 Mar 2013 14:34:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@couchdb.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 50222 invoked by uid 99); 26 Mar 2013 14:34:50 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 26 Mar 2013 14:34:50 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [80.244.253.218] (HELO mail.traeumt.net) (80.244.253.218) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 26 Mar 2013 14:34:43 +0000 Received: from [192.168.2.240] (pD4B88DFE.dip.t-dialin.net [212.184.141.254]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.traeumt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EE14B142CC for ; Tue, 26 Mar 2013 15:30:55 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\)) Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache CouchDB 1.3.0-rc.2 From: Jan Lehnardt In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2013 15:34:16 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: To: dev@couchdb.apache.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Mar 26, 2013, at 15:27 , Benoit Chesneau wrote: > On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Benoit Chesneau = wrote: >> -1. >>=20 >> Like most of the people there, tests aren't OK here until patched. >> Since we already have a patch, I would like like Jan [1] propose >> another vote with this patch committed in 1.3.x. . >=20 > Just to clarify a little i'm -1 because the tests aren't passing. And > I think it's important to have make check working for most people > especially the vendors and distributors. I fall in a similar line now, but I=92d like to hear from others here = that are closer to packaging (Joan, (Ran|Wen)dall, Dirkjan, etc.) as to how = much impact this would have. I could be convinced that this is a nuisance for 1.3.0, but not a = blocker. Jan --