Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-river-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: (qmail 56222 invoked from network); 27 Jan 2009 16:03:04 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 27 Jan 2009 16:03:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 57510 invoked by uid 500); 27 Jan 2009 16:03:03 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-river-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 57491 invoked by uid 500); 27 Jan 2009 16:03:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact river-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: river-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list river-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 57480 invoked by uid 99); 27 Jan 2009 16:03:03 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 27 Jan 2009 08:03:03 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of jukka.zitting@gmail.com designates 72.14.220.158 as permitted sender) Received: from [72.14.220.158] (HELO fg-out-1718.google.com) (72.14.220.158) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 27 Jan 2009 16:02:55 +0000 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id e12so168340fga.26 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2009 08:02:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=dolOSFFqLXozO3yYqMuHbnPkzoT38hGjiCsTM3wdgvo=; b=wYfLUyopv7dRqDLw5pFGqNgOd84j653bDxdKh/1LTYwiWC9/PrbBZyIhalBMrbBS8X pMxyhfN3oaR0pi8o/K3Qi3vguNkMqAj0QScSBqGqJmq81PwTKMtyieFHxJIw7ifcNokv qcz4Uwb+C1FoEvPW2zlsSKTbawhXE/YwvOyvU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Irk5o4FVIS8PmX6H8mpBvIJm2YDCfrlOLDIZJcD2+fZoDksBkwZ7zg49TKDOlcU1m3 Box4NLjQ3fWeqxiHRkFcqzLIiEsxnGi5OpQ3Tiu6nWnXvy4honL7F132ANzxfz1ks2SZ mAH6qfOAn4l5wdQBewNVBtfJPn702aM6nVHMc= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.181.153.12 with SMTP id f12mr1053584bko.132.1233072155240; Tue, 27 Jan 2009 08:02:35 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <26760.164.140.155.143.1232954799.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl> References: <26760.164.140.155.143.1232954799.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl> Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 17:02:35 +0100 Message-ID: <510143ac0901270802x7f766e02h84d7fddd163bbf46@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: Looking for patches to apply From: Jukka Zitting To: river-dev@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Hi, On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 8:26 AM, Mark Brouwer wrote: > It has been mentioned before but RIVER-160 contains a patch for 3 > issues in the list of outstanding issues, mainly enhancements to the > Service Browser with ServiceUI support. The fact that nobody reviews > them or notified me that at least he/she applied it locally to see > whether it works makes me hesitate to apply it. I can commit these > with a press of a button when I'm at home but it doesn't give me good > feeling to continue to work like this. I hear you. Unfortunately it seems that waiting for proper reviews is not going to get us anywhere. Can we come up with alternative failsafes, like improved test cases, etc.? BR, Jukka Zitting