Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-subversion-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-subversion-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6B4E2C641 for ; Mon, 3 Jun 2013 15:18:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 81464 invoked by uid 500); 3 Jun 2013 15:18:23 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-subversion-dev-archive@subversion.apache.org Received: (qmail 81407 invoked by uid 500); 3 Jun 2013 15:18:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@subversion.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@subversion.apache.org Received: (qmail 81400 invoked by uid 99); 3 Jun 2013 15:18:22 -0000 Received: from minotaur.apache.org (HELO minotaur.apache.org) (140.211.11.9) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 03 Jun 2013 15:18:22 +0000 Received: from localhost (HELO zulu.local) (127.0.0.1) (smtp-auth username brane, mechanism plain) by minotaur.apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 03 Jun 2013 15:18:21 +0000 Message-ID: <51ACB3BB.5040200@apache.org> Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2013 17:18:19 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?QnJhbmtvIMSMaWJlag==?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@subversion.apache.org Subject: Re: Serf issue #102 and 1.8.0 release timing References: <51ACA6B1.2010907@collab.net> In-Reply-To: <51ACA6B1.2010907@collab.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAAAXNSR0IArs4c6QAAADBQTFRF IhsbCy0qZjoVOVRoeFxSAIKBzXQiAKaibYiewnk7nn9z0qCTgL3i87Ep6Kx/+tHBsrE+zgAAAjZJ REFUOMvF0jFoE1EYB/CzjWlqIzaTjqVIBifRRWyG0t5iUqlLyFpCeXBgKg5yq6A4degUDJjoUDpc 1Qt4Ux94B11SOLB0KGS4discpbkORTCn9/m9d3fvLhXnvuHu3f+Xx/veyyfZfLSdZHzgicSfeyw4 JISwdz8FT6M8lM8Ceg385Dlhs+cC9sQCDn0B78QCogzwN+sxfHGOIXBbRGkNAM4cZymGtgNsDPgz cByxon3EEm1TLmvAlghoHOO3CZSa+IQ/vF6JV8tgKOMow78gRgL2/+EIvATOUtB3SSdMg4GXgrbn uk0uLiGdoCHKbX4E+t1FUTqn1AtIdPJebssDQ64YANSQyyaQNyUOFs0ijMsMFnOPTahPLXKYowtY 08MfCP7vR7hRnc5zmPK7CDYYbHcbC7tHuyFA94U/1LYZaJpu/sxACHMwvwZljTLY0TbNk4x+zuEt yC3MfCM6uSIvfwur0itFL4FA2Yal8BzLfnYV4EIGwEPAk7o5zIcnvzHMEjwJrrhAKK7on6IrsfRJ 7A53BhaK+CL7fj6+q/sPeOvcDTtoZTxpUYsFeIknrOXep3p3l7Ua+8sZ5FPQKyKwWi+DfROTU7ny C1/9UhpeY7K287WJCzbsNPQm2S6Yk4PSCNhWM2r3nD0K9liYb6yPgCRJhSzPrxUK0yUBVk1VX0lj s7MzGZyp0wImMK/e8rHbz2soL+O+2r1dxfGsAmBcx0lNjS/RUhlUC7gRn1wGMdQ7Vw1/AReW/RN3 xFWdAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I think it's clear that we have to wait for a Serf bugfix release before releasing RC3, and during that time our soak period is simply on hold. What happens after Serf 1.2.1 is released depends on the changes there. If it's just a trivial bugfix for the digest authn issue, then we can simply continue our soak (of which there are, IIRC, another two weeks). If not -- then we're faced with a significant change in a non-optional dependency and I can't think we can wiggle our way out of restarting the soak in that case. -- Brane