couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mutton, James" <jmut...@akamai.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Apache CouchDB 1.6.0-rc.3
Date Fri, 02 May 2014 15:59:02 GMT
Sounds like you guys made good progress on it in the last week.  I got stuck in a big storm
that hit the US South early this week and it completely screwed up my travel but I’m at
least back online now. :)

Alexander, sounds like you reproduced and are close to fixing the issue.  Is there an easy
shortcut to running a single test like this, I would love to have been able to make some actually
helpful progress in the few chances I had last week.

</JamesM>

On May 2, 2014, at 0:15, Alexander Shorin <kxepal@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 10:52 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman <dirkjan@ochtman.nl> wrote:
>> On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 1:13 AM, Alexander Shorin <kxepal@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> here is the status update: etap tests 231 and 200 were fixed on 1.6.x.
>>> The only issue left for replicator tests against R14B01.
>>> As for R14B01 issue I can provide the fix right now, but it's not
>>> very...correct. So the question is pretty simple: when you plan and
>>> will have a time to cut 1.6.0-rc4? If this will happens tomorrow so I
>>> have no reasons to hold the release. If I have day or two, I'd like to
>>> continue investigations to make fix more correct.
>> 
>> Thanks for the update. I think we can hold it a little bit longer. How
>> about we say I spin an rc.4 by Monday morning my time, and if you have
>> no news on this by then we consider just living with it?
> 
> Deal. Monday is good. Thanks!
> 
>>> Also, seems we have Erlang 17 support in master now...not single shot
>>> was made, but looks like it build now correct. I wonder if it worth to
>>> pick this fix to 1.6.x? Since Erlang 17 is already in Gentoo, Debian,
>>> OSX and CouchDB 1.7 will be released only in June or July (hope no
>>> more 1986-like issues will happens for us) - so I think this is actual
>>> question for now.
>> 
>> Hmm. How invasive has this been?
> 
> Well..as usual it could be with the shell bits (:
> 
> --
> ,,,^..^,,,


Mime
View raw message