On Jan 27, 2009, at 12:47 PM, Joshua Bronson wrote:
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 11:41 AM, Luke Tucker
<[email protected]> wrote:
Josh,
For dev versions if we have a really strict blocker requirement I
think it's okay as a temporary measure. I do not think we should
peg to versions otherwise in dev because we should move along with
these packages when there are bug fixes or other good reasons to do
so. It also gets us a head start in discovering incompatibilities
etc. in later versions. When there is a problem, we can make a
judgement call about whether to change our code or wait to update to
theirs.
Agreed, thanks for laying it down. http://trac.openplans.org/melkjug/changeset/1949
should be more in line with this. Note I'm maintaining a
dependency on Pylons<0.9.7dev since I think it will take a bit more
work than we want to invest at the moment to get up to date. I put
in a ticket for this so we can prioritize it accordingly: http://trac.openplans.org/melkjug/ticket/337
Thanks, yeah I do want to get up to speed with Pylons as soon as it
makes sense.
In this case, I'd actually like to see a bit more info: http://trac.openplans.org/melkjug/ticket/336#comment
:2
http://trac.openplans.org/melkjug/ticket/336#comment:3 (and by "i'm
stumped" i meant "this is probably not that crazy a bug but it's not
immediately obvious and i'm not sure if i should be spending much
more time on this at the moment given my other priorities" phew)
Cool, not a huge deal, I think I know what's up and it's fine to work
around it. (attached some notes to the ticket)
- Luke
