On 08/23/2011 05:57 PM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Branko Čibej <brane_at_xbc.nu> wrote:
>> On 23.08.2011 21:21, Stefan Sperling wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 09:03:15PM +0200, Branko Čibej wrote:
>>>> I wonder if it even makes sense to fix this case for upgrade. After all,
>>>> we could just tell users to unlock files before upgrading their working
>>> Do you mean that it doesn't need to be fixed, ever?
>>> Or that this isn't a critical fix to have in the .0 release?
>> It isn't critical to fix in the .0 release and not a good enough reason
>> to scrap RC1. I'd hesitate to call it a release blocker, after all,
>> there's a perfectly good workaround, and AFAIU not the only limitation
>> of the upgrader.
> Good points.
> At this point, I'm ready to run with the consensus, whatever that is.
Same here. My original post made the assumption that this problem was
already deemed a blocker (per Bert's vote and the IRC discussion I /join'd
in the middle of). But if it isn't and Bert will reverse his -1, let's move on.
C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
Received on 2011-08-24 00:00:57 CEST