On Apr 3, 2014, at 9:33 PM, Andrew Phillips wrote:
> Sure! I would then suggest waiting until Monday? That will barely change the
> vote deadline, since we don't count weekends, but gives us three extra days
> to clean things up. Does that sound reasonable?
+1
Everett
Can you wait until 11:30 am EDT to start the release on Friday?
Sure! I would then suggest waiting until Monday? That will barely
change the vote deadline, since we don't count weekends, but gives us
three extra days to clean things up. Does that sound reasonable?
I was going to ask what w
Should we change the default of ContentMetadataBuilder.contentType from
"application/unknown" to null? I previously encountered this odd
default in https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/44 . Would this
allow CloudFiles to guess the content type or must we hint via the
header?
On Thu, Apr 03, 2
Jeremy,
Thanks for surfacing this. I believe this header means that if the
content type is not set, the Swift cluster should try and determine
it. If the header is set, it will be a no-op. Is this correct? Will
there be any downsides of setting this header?
Also, the change itself may not be just
Hi all,
I realize that this is cutting it close, but here is a 3 line change to
Swift that I would like to include into the 1.7.2 release.
When using BlobBuilder to create a Blob, down in the guts of
ContentMetadataBuilder[1] sets the default content type to
"application/unknown", which should no
+1 to waiting until Friday if it works for you. We'd better make sure there
won't be push issues in the middle of the release.
On 3 April 2014 18:25, Everett Toews wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> We're being held up on merging stuff because of LDAP issues at the ASF.
>
> Rather than starting the releas
Hi Andrew,
We’re being held up on merging stuff because of LDAP issues at the ASF.
Rather than starting the release in the evening when no one is around, can you
please wait until Friday morning?
That way tonight you can review the activity from today and tomorrow we can all
be on IRC to make
Hi Jeremy,
That is exactly what I am suggesting, yes.
My initial reaction was that this would be very confusing, however, with the
right deprecation messages it should be ok.
From: Jeremy Daggett [jeremy.dagg...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2014 8:44 AM
I'm stuck travelling during the day today, so won't be able to start
the release until the evening. Unless anyone urgently needs more time,
I'd be planning to start cutting the release when I get back online
this evening EDT.
ap
Hi Zack,
Just to make this clear, we would have both packages:
org.jclouds.openstack.neutron.v2_0.*
org.jclouds.openstack.neutron.v2.*
... and then deprecate the v2_0 one in 1.8, to be removed in jclouds 2.0?
WDYT?
/jd
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 2:38 PM, Zack Shoylev wrote:
> I would hold off on
10 matches
Mail list logo
