On Tue, 05 May 2009 16:57:21 +0200, Hanno Schlichting
wrote:
Hi.
To summarize the feedback from the European time zone, I think that the
proposal in general meets the favor of everyone.
The controversial issue is the exact version number to use for the
release. There seems to be broad suppo
Andreas Zeidler writes:
> On May 5, 2009, at 11:11 PM, Ross Patterson wrote:
>> I should clarify my question here. Is there an issue with making sure
>> that the backed up BLOB directory is consistent with a particular
>> backed
>> up state of the Data.fs via repozo.
>
> no. the only important
On May 5, 2009, at 11:11 PM, Ross Patterson wrote:
I should clarify my question here. Is there an issue with making sure
that the backed up BLOB directory is consistent with a particular
backed
up state of the Data.fs via repozo.
no. the only important bit is to not pack the zodb before th
Ross Patterson wrote:
Andreas Zeidler writes:
On May 5, 2009, at 10:05 PM, Ross Patterson wrote:
BLOBs: Has the backups/repozo story been sufficiently worked out?
this will need a good backup story, but it won't be via repozo.
repozo was meant to backup a single data.fs, but not your entire
Lennart Regebro
writes:
> On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 22:05, Ross Patterson wrote:
>> Sorry if I'm resurrecting an already fairly resolved debate. None of
>> the concerns I raise here are enough to vote -1 one calling it
>> 4.0. But if enough people feel as I do here, maybe we should discuss
>> a l
Andreas Zeidler writes:
> On May 5, 2009, at 10:05 PM, Ross Patterson wrote:
>> BLOBs: Has the backups/repozo story been sufficiently worked out?
>
> this will need a good backup story, but it won't be via repozo.
> repozo was meant to backup a single data.fs, but not your entire
> zodb. the blo
On May 5, 2009, at 10:05 PM, Ross Patterson wrote:
BLOBs: Has the backups/repozo story been sufficiently worked out?
this will need a good backup story, but it won't be via repozo.
repozo was meant to backup a single data.fs, but not your entire
zodb. the blob storage will tend to be big
In general, +1. More below.
Hanno Schlichting
writes:
> To summarize the feedback from the European time zone, I think that the
> proposal in general meets the favor of everyone.
>
> The controversial issue is the exact version number to use for the
> release. There seems to be broad support fo
Am Tue, 05 May 2009 16:57:21 +0200 schrieb Hanno Schlichting:
> Hi.
>
> To summarize the feedback from the European time zone, I think that the
> proposal in general meets the favor of everyone.
>
> The controversial issue is the exact version number to use for the
> release. There seems to be b
Hanno Schlichting schrieb:
Hi.
To summarize the feedback from the European time zone, I think that the
proposal in general meets the favor of everyone.
The controversial issue is the exact version number to use for the
release. There seems to be broad support for freeing the current Plone
trunk
10 matches
Mail list logo
