Hi Chris,
I was planning to spend some time on that, but not before mid of next week
(maybe other devs are faster on that, though).
BUT I would ask in this specific case to make the 1.9.6 release nevertheless
and ASAP, because a whole bunch of non-SVN but 1.9.x users are waiting for
the next
On Sun, May 14, 2006 9:48 am, Christian Stimming wrote:
> that should serve the developers, not the other way round. That's why for
> this particular case, as we're still right in the middle of the unstable
> releases, I'd suggest to have a 1.9.6 release nevertheless.
I agree.
(Though I am hoping
Josh Sled wrote:
On Sun, May 14, 2006 9:48 am, Christian Stimming wrote:
that should serve the developers, not the other way round. That's why for
this particular case, as we're still right in the middle of the unstable
releases, I'd suggest to have a 1.9.6 release nevertheless.
I agr
On Sun, 2006-05-14 at 13:45 -0600, Chris Lyttle wrote:
> OK. If someone can go ahead and disable this test I'll release 1.9.6
> later today.
I've roughly commented out the test in the Makefile(.am).
--
...jsled
http://asynchronous.org/ - `a=jsled; b=asynchronous.org; echo [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 2006-05-14 at 17:06 -0400, Josh Sled wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-05-14 at 13:45 -0600, Chris Lyttle wrote:
> > OK. If someone can go ahead and disable this test I'll release 1.9.6
> > later today.
>
> I've roughly commented out the test in the Makefile(.am).
I've re-added test-period, as the l
--On May 14, 2006 6:26:25 PM -0400 Josh Sled <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On Sun, 2006-05-14 at 17:06 -0400, Josh Sled wrote:
On Sun, 2006-05-14 at 13:45 -0600, Chris Lyttle wrote:
> OK. If someone can go ahead and disable this test I'll release
> 1.9.6 later today.
I've roughly commented out
