You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Ben Reser <be...@reser.org> on 2004/07/28 00:13:17 UTC
Re: Restarting 1.1.0 soak to include IRI support (was: svn commit: r10386 - in trunk/subversion: include libsvn_subr tests/libsvn_subr)
On Sat, Jul 24, 2004 at 10:35:09AM -0400, Garrett Rooney wrote:
> Greg Hudson wrote:
> >It can go into 1.1.0, but only if we restart the four-week soak period.
> >(Which, given the magnitude of problems discovered so far, might be a
> >good idea anyway.)
>
> Given the usability issues this solves, perhaps holding up 1.1.0 so we
> can get it in is a good idea.
Let's not do that. I'd rather we put this in 1.2.0 so we can have some
experience running it before we start trying to put it in a release.
We've already got enough bugs to work out before we do 1.1.0. Let's not
start adding functionality that creates the potential for more. If
1.1.0 was complete enough to be 1.1.0 last week, then it's still
complete enough.
As far as restarting our soak period without adding functionality, I
have no objection.
--
Ben Reser <be...@reser.org>
http://ben.reser.org
"Conscience is the inner voice which warns us somebody may be looking."
- H.L. Mencken
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Restarting 1.1.0 soak to include IRI support (was: svn commit:
r10386 - in trunk/subversion: include libsvn_subr tests/libsvn_subr)
Posted by "Peter N. Lundblad" <pe...@famlundblad.se>.
On Tue, 27 Jul 2004, Ben Reser wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 24, 2004 at 10:35:09AM -0400, Garrett Rooney wrote:
> > Greg Hudson wrote:
> > >It can go into 1.1.0, but only if we restart the four-week soak period.
> > >(Which, given the magnitude of problems discovered so far, might be a
> > >good idea anyway.)
> >
> > Given the usability issues this solves, perhaps holding up 1.1.0 so we
> > can get it in is a good idea.
>
> Let's not do that. I'd rather we put this in 1.2.0 so we can have some
> experience running it before we start trying to put it in a release.
> We've already got enough bugs to work out before we do 1.1.0. Let's not
That's a classical trap, I think. Maybe I was to quick to nominate and
vote for it. I'm fine either way.
//Peter
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org