That would be much easier for me, if you do that. Then I only have to update my local checkout of the RC1 and run the release again.
Let me know what you do :-) Frank On Nov 7, 2007 12:53 PM, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > i can try to patch the RC1 tag if that is easier. and then just the image > test. > people shouldnt redeploy then (when developing) or use it in production. > > On 11/7/07, Frank Bille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Well, I could do it from head again and just restart it totally. Would > it > > then be fair to say that all issues said to be fixed for rc2 should set > to > > fixed for rc1? > > > > I'll do it tonight around 7pm GMT+2 > > > > Frank > > > > > > On Nov 6, 2007 12:13 AM, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > ok so what are we going to do? > > > rebuild? > > > From head or do you want to patch a branch? (ugh...) > > > > > > Because if we make new one then also take the RequestContext fix with > it. > > > > > > johan > > > > > > > > > > > > On 11/5/07, Frank Bille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > On 11/5/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Johan has fixed the code and the tests. However, he assured me > that > > > > > the test failure shouldn't cause problems in application code. > > > > > > > > > > I'm changing my vote to -1. I think shipping a release candidate > with > > > > > a test failure gives the wrong impression. Though the failures > don't > > > > > occur on most machines, I think we should take the high road and > > > > > rebuild the release with the patch in. > > > > > > > > > > The patch can be taken from head and applied to the release > branch. > > > > > The release can then be recreated and the vote restarted. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree. > > > > > > > > But I don't have time tomorrow to do it, so it will be Wednesday. > > > > > > > > Frank > > > > > > > > > >
