curator-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Cameron McKenzie <mckenzie....@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Status on 2.9.0
Date Mon, 31 Aug 2015 03:26:13 GMT
Ok, I think that's ready to be merged then. Mike's had a look at the PR.

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <
jordan@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:

> Yes - I think simple logging is the best thing for CURATOR-228.
>
>
> On August 30, 2015 at 4:05:52 PM, Cameron McKenzie (mckenzie.cam@gmail.com)
> wrote:
>
> You are indeed correct! I was referring to CURATOR-228.
>
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 8:48 AM, Jordan Zimmerman <
> jordan@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
>
>> CURATOR-233? Do you mean something else?
>>
>>
>>
>> On August 30, 2015 at 3:02:18 PM, Cameron McKenzie (
>> mckenzie.cam@gmail.com) wrote:
>>
>> What are people's thoughts on CURATOR-233? I think that it may be worth
>> merging in the fix that I have done for CURATOR-233 (just logging a
>> warning) as this will stop the hard loop occurring in this situation.
>>
>> It's not a perfect fix by any means, but it's better than the current
>> state
>> of affairs. Maybe we could use this to close CURATOR-233 and open another
>> for a more reliable fix that respects the persistent ephemeral contract?
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 3:07 AM, Jordan Zimmerman <
>> jordan@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
>>
>> > The only outstanding issue on 2.9.0 is CURATOR-233. I’d like to push
>> that
>> > to 2.9.1 and get a release started. Thoughts?
>> >
>> > -Jordan
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message