Ben Reser wrote:
> Well just waiting is a good way of ensuring that bugs that are
> exceedingly annoying to you end up getting in a release. A lot of us
> use the software, but most of the developers don't really use the ls
> command. Not trying to lay blame here. Just pointing out that if we're
> going to shorten the soak time (which we did becasue many people felt a
> month was too long), users who care about having clean releases need to
> be proactive in testing the release for features that matter to them.
For what it's worth, I've been testing the RCs but was on vacation
without Internet access for the week between RC4 and 1.1.0. (until just
yesterday actually, and still trying to catch up on the email :)
Maybe the seriousness of this issue would suggest that although a month
may be too long for a resoak, a week may be too short? Would two weeks
perhaps be better?
I'm fine with waiting for 1.1.1 whenever it comes. It's unfortunate
that the slowdown is a showstopper for my company, but I can apply the
r11211 patch in the meantime. And I'd also like to help out if I can.
Is marking issues for a 1.1.1 milestone something I can volunteer for,
or at least help with? (along with catching up on filing patch issues,
of course)
-- Mike
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Oct 5 09:19:04 2004