Re: Time for 1.6.18?

On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 11:39:13AM -0800, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 1:25 PM, Blair Zajac <blair_at_orcaware.com> wrote:
> > With a fsfs corruption bug found and fixed this week [1], should we cut a
> > 1.6.18?  1.6.17 was tagged 8 months ago.  If we don't cut a new release,
> > then we should probably let downstream distributions know about the issue so
> > they can patch their builds.
>
> I've got time this week if folks are interested in this. Any other
> pressing items for 1.6.18?

    Any chance the mergeinfo memory leak fix could be included? This
    issue is severely affecting one of my clients, and they're still
    on 1.6.x at the moment. If it could be included in .18, I won't
    have to patch it manually :-)

    Extract from 1.7.x's STATUS log w/ relevant revs below.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
r1235929 | danielsh | 2012-01-25 15:36:42 -0500 (Wed, 25 Jan 2012) | 15 lines

Merge the r1235264 group from trunk:

 * r1235264, r1235296, r1235302, r1235736
   Fix a swig-py memory leak.
   Justification:
     Seen in the wild with significant effects.
   Notes:
     r1235264 is the fix.
     r1235296 adds a regression test.
     r1235302 is trivial / obvious fix.
     r1235736 is trivial / obvious fix.
   Votes:
     +1: danielsh
     +0: rhuijben

------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regards,

        Trent.
Received on 2012-02-06 21:22:56 CET