You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@hbase.apache.org by Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org> on 2015/09/22 00:18:43 UTC
Thinking of HBase 1.1.3 [was HBASE-14317 and 1.1.3]
Hi folks,
It's that time again, I'm looking at spinning 1.1.3 bit this week, with
hopes that we can get a release out in early October. The only issue I'm
actively tracking as a must for this release is HBASE-14374, the back port
for HBASE-14317. Is there anything else you're planning to get in for this
one that's not been committed yet? Please speak up. I'll be starting my
pre-release validations tomorrow or Wednesday.
Thanks,
Nick
On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 4:08 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
> > PMC: do you have bandwidth to test yet another round of RC's?
>
> Yes, absolutely, and if you'd also like help making the RCs mail me
> privately.
>
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 8:11 AM, Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > I know we just got through voting periods on three patch releases, but
> > HBASE-14317 is looking pretty bad by my eye. Given we have a fix on our
> > end, I'm up for spinning 1.1.3 a couple weeks early. How does the
> community
> > feel about it? Users: do you need this patch immediately? PMC: do you
> have
> > bandwidth to test yet another round of RC's? I'm not on JIRA yet this
> > morning; is there other nastiness we should get fixed in an accelerated
> .3
> > as well?
> >
> > Thanks for your thoughts and your time.
> > -n
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
>
> - Andy
>
> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> (via Tom White)
>
Re: Thinking of HBase 1.1.3 [was HBASE-14317 and 1.1.3]
Posted by Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org>.
Status update.
A patch for HBASE-14474 was committed, but the issue has been reopened as
verification is ongoing. HBASE-14475 looks very close. On HBASE-14394, I
reviewed Jerry's addendum; it satisfies the compatibility report and has my
+1.
All other issues I've kicked out of 1.1.3 release. If your ticket is close
(can commit in the next 48 hours) and I've removed it, please let me know
and we'll bring it back in.
Thanks,
Nick
On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 6:01 PM, Enis Söztutar <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Agreed that we should not change the declared interface for TRR in patch
> releases. Ugly, but we can rethrow as RuntimeException or ignore in 1.1 and
> before.
>
> I think this is also a blocker:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14474
>
> Enis
>
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 3:50 PM, Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> I've run the compatibility checking tool [0] between branch-1.1
>> (0bf97bac2ed564994a0bcda5f1993260bf0b448f) and 1.1.0
>> (e860c66d41ddc8231004b646098a58abca7fb523). There has been a little bit of
>> drift, but nothing that I think is release-blocking. However, I'd like to
>> bring it to your attention here, before it sinks an RC. You can compare
>> this to the run between 1.1.0 and 1.1.2RC2, which became 1.1.2 [1]. Notice
>> we've added a handful of methods, which is acceptable according to our
>> guidelines [2].The question I have is about adding throws IOException
>> to TableRecordReader.close(). IOException is in the interface declaration
>> of the super type, but this will require a source code change for anyone
>> consuming our type directly. I believe, according to [2], this breaks our
>> guidelines for a patch release.
>>
>> I've also sent a note over to HBASE-14394 [3] regarding the added public
>> and undocumented method to TableRecordReader, so there's potentially two
>> addendum's required for this patch.
>>
>> How would the community like to proceed?
>>
>> [0]:
>> http://people.apache.org/~ndimiduk/1.1.0_branch-1.1_compat_report.html
>> [1]: http://people.apache.org/~ndimiduk/1.1.0_1.1.2RC2_compat_report.html
>> [2]: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#hbase.versioning
>> [3]:
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14394?focusedCommentId=14905429&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-14905429
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi folks,
>> >
>> > It's that time again, I'm looking at spinning 1.1.3 bit this week, with
>> > hopes that we can get a release out in early October. The only issue I'm
>> > actively tracking as a must for this release is HBASE-14374, the back
>> port
>> > for HBASE-14317. Is there anything else you're planning to get in for
>> this
>> > one that's not been committed yet? Please speak up. I'll be starting my
>> > pre-release validations tomorrow or Wednesday.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Nick
>> >
>> > On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 4:08 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> > PMC: do you have bandwidth to test yet another round of RC's?
>> >>
>> >> Yes, absolutely, and if you'd also like help making the RCs mail me
>> >> privately.
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 8:11 AM, Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Hi folks,
>> >> >
>> >> > I know we just got through voting periods on three patch releases,
>> but
>> >> > HBASE-14317 is looking pretty bad by my eye. Given we have a fix on
>> our
>> >> > end, I'm up for spinning 1.1.3 a couple weeks early. How does the
>> >> community
>> >> > feel about it? Users: do you need this patch immediately? PMC: do you
>> >> have
>> >> > bandwidth to test yet another round of RC's? I'm not on JIRA yet this
>> >> > morning; is there other nastiness we should get fixed in an
>> accelerated
>> >> .3
>> >> > as well?
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks for your thoughts and your time.
>> >> > -n
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Best regards,
>> >>
>> >> - Andy
>> >>
>> >> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet
>> Hein
>> >> (via Tom White)
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
Re: Thinking of HBase 1.1.3 [was HBASE-14317 and 1.1.3]
Posted by Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org>.
Status update.
A patch for HBASE-14474 was committed, but the issue has been reopened as
verification is ongoing. HBASE-14475 looks very close. On HBASE-14394, I
reviewed Jerry's addendum; it satisfies the compatibility report and has my
+1.
All other issues I've kicked out of 1.1.3 release. If your ticket is close
(can commit in the next 48 hours) and I've removed it, please let me know
and we'll bring it back in.
Thanks,
Nick
On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 6:01 PM, Enis Söztutar <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Agreed that we should not change the declared interface for TRR in patch
> releases. Ugly, but we can rethrow as RuntimeException or ignore in 1.1 and
> before.
>
> I think this is also a blocker:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14474
>
> Enis
>
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 3:50 PM, Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> I've run the compatibility checking tool [0] between branch-1.1
>> (0bf97bac2ed564994a0bcda5f1993260bf0b448f) and 1.1.0
>> (e860c66d41ddc8231004b646098a58abca7fb523). There has been a little bit of
>> drift, but nothing that I think is release-blocking. However, I'd like to
>> bring it to your attention here, before it sinks an RC. You can compare
>> this to the run between 1.1.0 and 1.1.2RC2, which became 1.1.2 [1]. Notice
>> we've added a handful of methods, which is acceptable according to our
>> guidelines [2].The question I have is about adding throws IOException
>> to TableRecordReader.close(). IOException is in the interface declaration
>> of the super type, but this will require a source code change for anyone
>> consuming our type directly. I believe, according to [2], this breaks our
>> guidelines for a patch release.
>>
>> I've also sent a note over to HBASE-14394 [3] regarding the added public
>> and undocumented method to TableRecordReader, so there's potentially two
>> addendum's required for this patch.
>>
>> How would the community like to proceed?
>>
>> [0]:
>> http://people.apache.org/~ndimiduk/1.1.0_branch-1.1_compat_report.html
>> [1]: http://people.apache.org/~ndimiduk/1.1.0_1.1.2RC2_compat_report.html
>> [2]: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#hbase.versioning
>> [3]:
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14394?focusedCommentId=14905429&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-14905429
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi folks,
>> >
>> > It's that time again, I'm looking at spinning 1.1.3 bit this week, with
>> > hopes that we can get a release out in early October. The only issue I'm
>> > actively tracking as a must for this release is HBASE-14374, the back
>> port
>> > for HBASE-14317. Is there anything else you're planning to get in for
>> this
>> > one that's not been committed yet? Please speak up. I'll be starting my
>> > pre-release validations tomorrow or Wednesday.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Nick
>> >
>> > On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 4:08 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> > PMC: do you have bandwidth to test yet another round of RC's?
>> >>
>> >> Yes, absolutely, and if you'd also like help making the RCs mail me
>> >> privately.
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 8:11 AM, Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Hi folks,
>> >> >
>> >> > I know we just got through voting periods on three patch releases,
>> but
>> >> > HBASE-14317 is looking pretty bad by my eye. Given we have a fix on
>> our
>> >> > end, I'm up for spinning 1.1.3 a couple weeks early. How does the
>> >> community
>> >> > feel about it? Users: do you need this patch immediately? PMC: do you
>> >> have
>> >> > bandwidth to test yet another round of RC's? I'm not on JIRA yet this
>> >> > morning; is there other nastiness we should get fixed in an
>> accelerated
>> >> .3
>> >> > as well?
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks for your thoughts and your time.
>> >> > -n
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Best regards,
>> >>
>> >> - Andy
>> >>
>> >> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet
>> Hein
>> >> (via Tom White)
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
Re: Thinking of HBase 1.1.3 [was HBASE-14317 and 1.1.3]
Posted by Enis Söztutar <en...@gmail.com>.
Agreed that we should not change the declared interface for TRR in patch
releases. Ugly, but we can rethrow as RuntimeException or ignore in 1.1 and
before.
I think this is also a blocker:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14474
Enis
On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 3:50 PM, Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org> wrote:
> I've run the compatibility checking tool [0] between branch-1.1
> (0bf97bac2ed564994a0bcda5f1993260bf0b448f) and 1.1.0
> (e860c66d41ddc8231004b646098a58abca7fb523). There has been a little bit of
> drift, but nothing that I think is release-blocking. However, I'd like to
> bring it to your attention here, before it sinks an RC. You can compare
> this to the run between 1.1.0 and 1.1.2RC2, which became 1.1.2 [1]. Notice
> we've added a handful of methods, which is acceptable according to our
> guidelines [2].The question I have is about adding throws IOException
> to TableRecordReader.close(). IOException is in the interface declaration
> of the super type, but this will require a source code change for anyone
> consuming our type directly. I believe, according to [2], this breaks our
> guidelines for a patch release.
>
> I've also sent a note over to HBASE-14394 [3] regarding the added public
> and undocumented method to TableRecordReader, so there's potentially two
> addendum's required for this patch.
>
> How would the community like to proceed?
>
> [0]:
> http://people.apache.org/~ndimiduk/1.1.0_branch-1.1_compat_report.html
> [1]: http://people.apache.org/~ndimiduk/1.1.0_1.1.2RC2_compat_report.html
> [2]: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#hbase.versioning
> [3]:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14394?focusedCommentId=14905429&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-14905429
>
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > It's that time again, I'm looking at spinning 1.1.3 bit this week, with
> > hopes that we can get a release out in early October. The only issue I'm
> > actively tracking as a must for this release is HBASE-14374, the back
> port
> > for HBASE-14317. Is there anything else you're planning to get in for
> this
> > one that's not been committed yet? Please speak up. I'll be starting my
> > pre-release validations tomorrow or Wednesday.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Nick
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 4:08 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> > PMC: do you have bandwidth to test yet another round of RC's?
> >>
> >> Yes, absolutely, and if you'd also like help making the RCs mail me
> >> privately.
> >>
> >> On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 8:11 AM, Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi folks,
> >> >
> >> > I know we just got through voting periods on three patch releases, but
> >> > HBASE-14317 is looking pretty bad by my eye. Given we have a fix on
> our
> >> > end, I'm up for spinning 1.1.3 a couple weeks early. How does the
> >> community
> >> > feel about it? Users: do you need this patch immediately? PMC: do you
> >> have
> >> > bandwidth to test yet another round of RC's? I'm not on JIRA yet this
> >> > morning; is there other nastiness we should get fixed in an
> accelerated
> >> .3
> >> > as well?
> >> >
> >> > Thanks for your thoughts and your time.
> >> > -n
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Best regards,
> >>
> >> - Andy
> >>
> >> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> >> (via Tom White)
> >>
> >
> >
>
Re: Thinking of HBase 1.1.3 [was HBASE-14317 and 1.1.3]
Posted by Enis Söztutar <en...@gmail.com>.
Agreed that we should not change the declared interface for TRR in patch
releases. Ugly, but we can rethrow as RuntimeException or ignore in 1.1 and
before.
I think this is also a blocker:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14474
Enis
On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 3:50 PM, Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org> wrote:
> I've run the compatibility checking tool [0] between branch-1.1
> (0bf97bac2ed564994a0bcda5f1993260bf0b448f) and 1.1.0
> (e860c66d41ddc8231004b646098a58abca7fb523). There has been a little bit of
> drift, but nothing that I think is release-blocking. However, I'd like to
> bring it to your attention here, before it sinks an RC. You can compare
> this to the run between 1.1.0 and 1.1.2RC2, which became 1.1.2 [1]. Notice
> we've added a handful of methods, which is acceptable according to our
> guidelines [2].The question I have is about adding throws IOException
> to TableRecordReader.close(). IOException is in the interface declaration
> of the super type, but this will require a source code change for anyone
> consuming our type directly. I believe, according to [2], this breaks our
> guidelines for a patch release.
>
> I've also sent a note over to HBASE-14394 [3] regarding the added public
> and undocumented method to TableRecordReader, so there's potentially two
> addendum's required for this patch.
>
> How would the community like to proceed?
>
> [0]:
> http://people.apache.org/~ndimiduk/1.1.0_branch-1.1_compat_report.html
> [1]: http://people.apache.org/~ndimiduk/1.1.0_1.1.2RC2_compat_report.html
> [2]: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#hbase.versioning
> [3]:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14394?focusedCommentId=14905429&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-14905429
>
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > It's that time again, I'm looking at spinning 1.1.3 bit this week, with
> > hopes that we can get a release out in early October. The only issue I'm
> > actively tracking as a must for this release is HBASE-14374, the back
> port
> > for HBASE-14317. Is there anything else you're planning to get in for
> this
> > one that's not been committed yet? Please speak up. I'll be starting my
> > pre-release validations tomorrow or Wednesday.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Nick
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 4:08 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> > PMC: do you have bandwidth to test yet another round of RC's?
> >>
> >> Yes, absolutely, and if you'd also like help making the RCs mail me
> >> privately.
> >>
> >> On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 8:11 AM, Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi folks,
> >> >
> >> > I know we just got through voting periods on three patch releases, but
> >> > HBASE-14317 is looking pretty bad by my eye. Given we have a fix on
> our
> >> > end, I'm up for spinning 1.1.3 a couple weeks early. How does the
> >> community
> >> > feel about it? Users: do you need this patch immediately? PMC: do you
> >> have
> >> > bandwidth to test yet another round of RC's? I'm not on JIRA yet this
> >> > morning; is there other nastiness we should get fixed in an
> accelerated
> >> .3
> >> > as well?
> >> >
> >> > Thanks for your thoughts and your time.
> >> > -n
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Best regards,
> >>
> >> - Andy
> >>
> >> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> >> (via Tom White)
> >>
> >
> >
>
Re: Thinking of HBase 1.1.3 [was HBASE-14317 and 1.1.3]
Posted by Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org>.
I've run the compatibility checking tool [0] between branch-1.1
(0bf97bac2ed564994a0bcda5f1993260bf0b448f) and 1.1.0
(e860c66d41ddc8231004b646098a58abca7fb523). There has been a little bit of
drift, but nothing that I think is release-blocking. However, I'd like to
bring it to your attention here, before it sinks an RC. You can compare
this to the run between 1.1.0 and 1.1.2RC2, which became 1.1.2 [1]. Notice
we've added a handful of methods, which is acceptable according to our
guidelines [2].The question I have is about adding throws IOException
to TableRecordReader.close(). IOException is in the interface declaration
of the super type, but this will require a source code change for anyone
consuming our type directly. I believe, according to [2], this breaks our
guidelines for a patch release.
I've also sent a note over to HBASE-14394 [3] regarding the added public
and undocumented method to TableRecordReader, so there's potentially two
addendum's required for this patch.
How would the community like to proceed?
[0]: http://people.apache.org/~ndimiduk/1.1.0_branch-1.1_compat_report.html
[1]: http://people.apache.org/~ndimiduk/1.1.0_1.1.2RC2_compat_report.html
[2]: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#hbase.versioning
[3]:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14394?focusedCommentId=14905429&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-14905429
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> It's that time again, I'm looking at spinning 1.1.3 bit this week, with
> hopes that we can get a release out in early October. The only issue I'm
> actively tracking as a must for this release is HBASE-14374, the back port
> for HBASE-14317. Is there anything else you're planning to get in for this
> one that's not been committed yet? Please speak up. I'll be starting my
> pre-release validations tomorrow or Wednesday.
>
> Thanks,
> Nick
>
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 4:08 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> > PMC: do you have bandwidth to test yet another round of RC's?
>>
>> Yes, absolutely, and if you'd also like help making the RCs mail me
>> privately.
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 8:11 AM, Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi folks,
>> >
>> > I know we just got through voting periods on three patch releases, but
>> > HBASE-14317 is looking pretty bad by my eye. Given we have a fix on our
>> > end, I'm up for spinning 1.1.3 a couple weeks early. How does the
>> community
>> > feel about it? Users: do you need this patch immediately? PMC: do you
>> have
>> > bandwidth to test yet another round of RC's? I'm not on JIRA yet this
>> > morning; is there other nastiness we should get fixed in an accelerated
>> .3
>> > as well?
>> >
>> > Thanks for your thoughts and your time.
>> > -n
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>>
>> - Andy
>>
>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
>> (via Tom White)
>>
>
>
Re: Thinking of HBase 1.1.3 [was HBASE-14317 and 1.1.3]
Posted by Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org>.
I've run the compatibility checking tool [0] between branch-1.1
(0bf97bac2ed564994a0bcda5f1993260bf0b448f) and 1.1.0
(e860c66d41ddc8231004b646098a58abca7fb523). There has been a little bit of
drift, but nothing that I think is release-blocking. However, I'd like to
bring it to your attention here, before it sinks an RC. You can compare
this to the run between 1.1.0 and 1.1.2RC2, which became 1.1.2 [1]. Notice
we've added a handful of methods, which is acceptable according to our
guidelines [2].The question I have is about adding throws IOException
to TableRecordReader.close(). IOException is in the interface declaration
of the super type, but this will require a source code change for anyone
consuming our type directly. I believe, according to [2], this breaks our
guidelines for a patch release.
I've also sent a note over to HBASE-14394 [3] regarding the added public
and undocumented method to TableRecordReader, so there's potentially two
addendum's required for this patch.
How would the community like to proceed?
[0]: http://people.apache.org/~ndimiduk/1.1.0_branch-1.1_compat_report.html
[1]: http://people.apache.org/~ndimiduk/1.1.0_1.1.2RC2_compat_report.html
[2]: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#hbase.versioning
[3]:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14394?focusedCommentId=14905429&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-14905429
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> It's that time again, I'm looking at spinning 1.1.3 bit this week, with
> hopes that we can get a release out in early October. The only issue I'm
> actively tracking as a must for this release is HBASE-14374, the back port
> for HBASE-14317. Is there anything else you're planning to get in for this
> one that's not been committed yet? Please speak up. I'll be starting my
> pre-release validations tomorrow or Wednesday.
>
> Thanks,
> Nick
>
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 4:08 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> > PMC: do you have bandwidth to test yet another round of RC's?
>>
>> Yes, absolutely, and if you'd also like help making the RCs mail me
>> privately.
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 8:11 AM, Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi folks,
>> >
>> > I know we just got through voting periods on three patch releases, but
>> > HBASE-14317 is looking pretty bad by my eye. Given we have a fix on our
>> > end, I'm up for spinning 1.1.3 a couple weeks early. How does the
>> community
>> > feel about it? Users: do you need this patch immediately? PMC: do you
>> have
>> > bandwidth to test yet another round of RC's? I'm not on JIRA yet this
>> > morning; is there other nastiness we should get fixed in an accelerated
>> .3
>> > as well?
>> >
>> > Thanks for your thoughts and your time.
>> > -n
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>>
>> - Andy
>>
>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
>> (via Tom White)
>>
>
>