I've also only been porting to 4.1 so far (I'm assuming we'll release 4.1 soonish) but if we do a 4.0.1 I can re-visit ...
Mike McCandless http://blog.mikemccandless.com On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 8:28 AM, Mark Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > Initially, I started adding a 4.01 fix version to issues I thought should go > in if we did 4.01 - but then I could not resolve those issues without back > porting - which I didn't want to do in case we jumped to 4.1 or something - > call me lazy :) So I started labeling until it became clear we would do a > 4.01 - at which point I would change those labels to fix versions. > > I'm pretty sure we want a 4.01 at this point though. > > Mark > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Oct 17, 2012, at 7:13 PM, Chris Hostetter <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> I notice that the CHANGES.txt files on the lucene_solr_4_0 doesn't yet have >> a section for 4.0.1 bug fixes even though it looks like there have been some >> bug fix commits on that branch since 4.0.0 was released. >> >> On the other hand it looks like some folks (maybe just miller?) have been >> using the Jira label "4.0.1_Candidate" on issues that get committed to the >> branch_4x, but aren't being commited to lucene_solr_4_0 -- presumably as a >> reminder that we should backport if we do a 4.0.1 release >> >> All of which leaves me a bit confused: is there any concensus on how we >> should be dealing with (potential) 4.0.1 bug fixes? >> >> -Hoss >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
