[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: [serf-dev] Re: What stands between us and branching 1.7?

From: Lieven Govaerts <svnlgo_at_mobsol.be>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 00:18:20 +0100

On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 9:15 AM, Justin Erenkrantz <justin_at_erenkrantz.com>wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 1:04 PM, C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
> wrote:
> > On 01/06/2011 03:48 PM, Stefan Küng wrote:
> >> On 06.01.2011 21:41, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> >>> I'm sorry if I asked this before -- I've been asking individual folks
> for
> >>> over a month now, but I can't quickly find a public broadcast thread
> about
> >>> it, at least -- but I've been wondering lately:
> >>>
> >>> What, exactly, stands in the way of us branching for 1.7
> stabilization?
> >>>
> >>> ra_serf stabilization? No... that's fairly well taken care of, and
> would
> >>> fit perfectly within in the scope of post-branch work anyway.
> >>
> >> At least on Windows, I doubt that ra_serf is even used right now.
> Because of
> >> the huge memory leak serf has/had (See here:
> >> http://code.google.com/p/serf/source/detail?r=1416). But even though
> the
> >> leak is fixed, there hasn't been another release yet.
> >> With the latest release without that fix, serf is not usable at all.
> >> To get more people to test ra_serf, serf itself first needs a new
> release
> >> which includes that fix.
> >>
> >> Stefan
> >>
> >
> > Xlnt feedback. I've noted this on our roadmap.html page. What else?
>
> We could cut a serf bug fix release that has a few fixes that Lieven
> committed shortly after we released 0.7.0.

Greg or Lieven, any thoughts here? -- justin

At least the one rev that fixes this issue, don't know if the other are
already working in all scenario's.

I'll look at it this weekend and make a release.

Lieven
Received on 2011-01-21 00:19:18 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.