You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@couchdb.apache.org by Dave Cottlehuber <dc...@jsonified.com> on 2013/04/09 16:51:10 UTC
COUCHDB-1696 & deprecating R13B04
Hi folks,
While digging around in 1696 I found that:
- Bob Ippolito's commit[1] implies only R15B02 and up
- mochiweb' README[2] mentions testing against < R14A
The changes to keep R13B04 compatibility in CouchDB's mochi fork are not
huge, but with R16B here is it time to take the plunge and drop R13*
support?
[1]:
https://github.com/mochi/mochiweb/commit/d958876ebc4266d4a40b50ee8d79635d6f195fe9
[2]: https://github.com/mochi/mochiweb/
Re: COUCHDB-1696 & deprecating R13B04
Posted by Robert Newson <rn...@apache.org>.
master, yes.
On 23 April 2013 18:40, Benoit Chesneau <bc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> master i would say.
>
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 7:11 PM, Dave Cottlehuber <dc...@jsonified.com> wrote:
>> On 9 April 2013 16:55, Paul Davis <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I'm all for bumping our minimum requirement. Reading Bob's commit I'm
>>> not exactly sure which part is requiring a newer Erlang. Maybe one of
>>> the crypto functions is new?
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 9:51 AM, Dave Cottlehuber <dc...@jsonified.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi folks,
>>>>
>>>> While digging around in 1696 I found that:
>>>>
>>>> - Bob Ippolito's commit[1] implies only R15B02 and up
>>>> - mochiweb' README[2] mentions testing against < R14A
>>>>
>>>> The changes to keep R13B04 compatibility in CouchDB's mochi fork are not
>>>> huge, but with R16B here is it time to take the plunge and drop R13*
>>>> support?
>>
>> I guess we have lazy consensus on this, but I'm not clear what version
>> / branch this type of dependency change would apply to.
>>
>> 1.3.x? or is this a master/1.4.x thing only?
>>
>> A+
>> Dave
Re: COUCHDB-1696 & deprecating R13B04
Posted by Benoit Chesneau <bc...@gmail.com>.
master i would say.
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 7:11 PM, Dave Cottlehuber <dc...@jsonified.com> wrote:
> On 9 April 2013 16:55, Paul Davis <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I'm all for bumping our minimum requirement. Reading Bob's commit I'm
>> not exactly sure which part is requiring a newer Erlang. Maybe one of
>> the crypto functions is new?
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 9:51 AM, Dave Cottlehuber <dc...@jsonified.com> wrote:
>>> Hi folks,
>>>
>>> While digging around in 1696 I found that:
>>>
>>> - Bob Ippolito's commit[1] implies only R15B02 and up
>>> - mochiweb' README[2] mentions testing against < R14A
>>>
>>> The changes to keep R13B04 compatibility in CouchDB's mochi fork are not
>>> huge, but with R16B here is it time to take the plunge and drop R13*
>>> support?
>
> I guess we have lazy consensus on this, but I'm not clear what version
> / branch this type of dependency change would apply to.
>
> 1.3.x? or is this a master/1.4.x thing only?
>
> A+
> Dave
Re: COUCHDB-1696 & deprecating R13B04
Posted by Dave Cottlehuber <dc...@jsonified.com>.
On 9 April 2013 16:55, Paul Davis <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm all for bumping our minimum requirement. Reading Bob's commit I'm
> not exactly sure which part is requiring a newer Erlang. Maybe one of
> the crypto functions is new?
>
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 9:51 AM, Dave Cottlehuber <dc...@jsonified.com> wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> While digging around in 1696 I found that:
>>
>> - Bob Ippolito's commit[1] implies only R15B02 and up
>> - mochiweb' README[2] mentions testing against < R14A
>>
>> The changes to keep R13B04 compatibility in CouchDB's mochi fork are not
>> huge, but with R16B here is it time to take the plunge and drop R13*
>> support?
I guess we have lazy consensus on this, but I'm not clear what version
/ branch this type of dependency change would apply to.
1.3.x? or is this a master/1.4.x thing only?
A+
Dave
COUCHDB-1696 & deprecating R13B04
Posted by Dave Cottlehuber <dc...@jsonified.com>.
On 9 April 2013 16:55, Paul Davis <paul.joseph.davis@gmail.com<javascript:;>>
wrote:
> I'm all for bumping our minimum requirement. Reading Bob's commit I'm
> not exactly sure which part is requiring a newer Erlang. Maybe one of
> the crypto functions is new?
I think they're just leaving behind older Erlangs. And possibly that TZ
code too, fixed in R14. I assume the OTP team do still support R13B series
(albeit internally) until end of 2013? Not that its so relevant for us.
--
Sent from my PDP11
Re: COUCHDB-1696 & deprecating R13B04
Posted by Paul Davis <pa...@gmail.com>.
I'm all for bumping our minimum requirement. Reading Bob's commit I'm
not exactly sure which part is requiring a newer Erlang. Maybe one of
the crypto functions is new?
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 9:51 AM, Dave Cottlehuber <dc...@jsonified.com> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> While digging around in 1696 I found that:
>
> - Bob Ippolito's commit[1] implies only R15B02 and up
> - mochiweb' README[2] mentions testing against < R14A
>
> The changes to keep R13B04 compatibility in CouchDB's mochi fork are not
> huge, but with R16B here is it time to take the plunge and drop R13*
> support?
>
> [1]:
> https://github.com/mochi/mochiweb/commit/d958876ebc4266d4a40b50ee8d79635d6f195fe9
>
> [2]: https://github.com/mochi/mochiweb/