Thanks again, Antoine, for all your hard work on this release! Daniel
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 1:15 PM, Antoine Toulme <[email protected]>wrote: > The vote passed with 3 bindings +1 and 3 non-binding +1. > > Thanks everybody for your efforts on pushing this release out! > > I'll update the website and will push the gems to rubygems in the coming > days. > > Thanks, > > Antoine > > On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 10:28, Pepijn Van Eeckhoudt < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > I have to agree that issues with thr current 1.3.5 release are morr of a > > showstopper for my projects as well. Having to apply manual patches in > order > > to get things working on JRuby has held back our internal buildr > experiments > > for quite some time now. > > > > The patch is attached to the Jira issue Rhett created BTW. > > > > Pepijn > > > > Op 17-jun-2010 om 18:51 heeft Alex Boisvert <[email protected]> > het > > volgende geschreven:\ > > > > > > I agree. I think more people are affected by issues in 1.3.5 today than > >> would potentially be affected with 1.4.0 as it is. The way forward is > to > >> release 1.4.0 and address issues promptly as they are reported. We > can't > >> keep pushing 1.4.0 out. > >> > >> alex > >> > >> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 9:35 AM, Daniel Spiewak <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >> +1 on cutting the release now, fixing later. Again, remember that > there > >>> are > >>> very few bugs which are *more* critical than our outstanding rubygems > >>> issue > >>> with 1.3.5. > >>> > >>> Daniel > >>> > >>> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 11:26 AM, Antoine Toulme < > >>> [email protected] > >>> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>> > >>> You mean, the patch you attached to the dev list. > >>>> I have learnt first hand that patches have harmful side effects. > >>>> I'm not sure I want to change anything there. I am not sure having a > >>>> > >>> cycle > >>> > >>>> because you try to call things in the wrong order should be corrected. > >>>> The patch is not attached to a Jira bug, so I lost track of it. > >>>> > >>>> And most important, I'm out of juice. I need this release out now or > >>>> I'll > >>>> give up. That's me drawing the line in the sand. > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 09:15, Pepijn Van Eeckhoudt < > >>>> [email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On 17/6/2010 17:38, Antoine Toulme wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> I think we now have a good understanding of the problem. Mainly, > that > >>>>>> > >>>>> this > >>>> > >>>>> is not a good or valid approach. > >>>>>> Rhett pointed at a workaround ; I guess that using an enhance block > >>>>>> > >>>>> would > >>>> > >>>>> also have fixed the problem. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> But since there is a patch that solves the problem (at least in the > >>>>> > >>>> short > >>> > >>>> term) and doesn't break the current specs; why not include this in the > >>>>> > >>>> 1.4 > >>>> > >>>>> release? > >>>>> > >>>>> Pepijn > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> >
