On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 10:07 PM, Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 4, 2011 10:18 PM, "Greg Stein" <gstein_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jul 4, 2011 1:34 PM, "Hyrum K Wright" <hyrum_at_hyrumwright.org> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 10:37 AM, Philip Martin
>> > <philip.martin_at_wandisco.com> wrote:
>> > > "Bert Huijben" <bert_at_qqmail.nl> writes:
>> > >
>> > >> The issue Ivan Zhakov is looking at (r1141845, r1142065 and related)
>> > >> potentially breaks all current serf (and in some cases neon) clients
>> > >> against
>> > >> a HTTPv2 server.
>> > >>
>> > >> (And without that patch serf always retrieves full-texts over HTTPv2)
>> > >>
>> > >> Please don't call out almost-RCs before we got that worked out :)
>> > >
>> > > Is there an issue describing the problem?
>> > Not that I can see. As per our project-wide consensus regarding
>> > branching and releasing and release candidates and such, nothing in
>> > the issue tracker means that there isn't a blocking issue.
>> Don't be pedantic.
> That was probably a bit too flip, but the point is that we want to have
> problems *reported*. Saying it doesn't exist, despite one of our devs
> *clearly* stating that it *does* ... is just being ridiculous.
Agreed. I wasn't trying to be flippant (but probably came off that way).
> We want to ship the best product possible. This mailing list is defined to
> be our decision-making focus. It seems incorrect to disregard a reported
> problem simply because (for whatever reason) an issue is not in the tracker.
I don't claim that we should disregard the problem. I *do* claim that
we should more widely publicize blocking issues so that everybody can
be aware of them.
The greater point was that this seems to be something that various
people have kicking around in their heads. We agreed in Berlin (and
then discussed on this list) to use the issue tracker to record
blocking issues. I really don't want to be in the position of rolling
a possible release candidate, only to find out we're got all these
hidden issues that aren't being tracked in the agreed-upon public
Received on 2011-07-05 14:52:20 CEST