I really want to understand this; and to my intel transactions of such
amount of time are just not bound to fail, looking at the timestamp.
http://api.openstreetmap.org/api/0.5/way/28366538/history
http://api.openstreetmap.org/api/0.5/relation/108258/history
Alpinfuchs deleted way 28366538 at
On Mon, 6 Apr 2009, Dave Stubbs wrote:
Anyway, Shaun refactored the whole lot for API 0.6. It now atomically
checks relation consistency within the rails models when doing an
update rather than relying on the caller to do it. So this should be
fixed in a couple of weeks a long with everything
2009/4/6 Stefan de Konink ste...@konink.de:
On Mon, 6 Apr 2009, Dave Stubbs wrote:
Anyway, Shaun refactored the whole lot for API 0.6. It now atomically
checks relation consistency within the rails models when doing an
update rather than relying on the caller to do it. So this should be
2009/4/6 Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net:
Stefan de Konink wrote:
Now how is it possible that there was no 415 on that update?
I'm going to pass on this one as I didn't write the Potlatch
relations code, Dave did - any thoughts?
I'm guessing that's here:
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 1:12 PM, Dave Stubbs osm.l...@randomjunk.co.uk wrote:
So I'd just wait two weeks. It's not going to cause the world to end
in the meantime.
it might. i'm sure i can think up a semi-plausible situation involving
scientists at CERN being so frustrated with the broken
it might. i'm sure i can think up a semi-plausible situation
involving
scientists at CERN being so frustrated with the broken
relations they
don't notice that LHC is creating a massive black-hole. ;-)
They won't have restarted it since the repairs within the next two
weeks. From
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 5:45 PM, Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk wrote:
The current schedule foresees the final magnet being reinstalled by
the end of March 2009, with the LHC being cold and ready for
powering tests by the end of June 2009.
LHC 0.6... weird ;-)
cheers,
matt
7 matches
Mail list logo
