> On Thu, 1 Jul 2010 08:06:49 +0200, Bart Van Assche
> said:
BVA> Since the last time I fixed the MSVC and MinGW builds, these builds have
BVA> been broken again by the recent changes in the transport implementation.
BVA> These changes should not be reverted but the MSVC and MinGW builds
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 12:52 AM, Wes Hardaker <
[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 18:44:20 +0200, Bart Van Assche <
> [email protected]> said:
>
> BVA> What are the criteria for a prerelease ? I assume that the source code
> BVA> should at least build ? Currently
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 18:44:20 +0200, Bart Van Assche
> said:
BVA> What are the criteria for a prerelease ? I assume that the source code
BVA> should at least build ? Currently both the MinGW and the MSVC builds are
BVA> broken, and two Cygwin regression tests fail.
The last message I c
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 18:44:20 +0200, Bart Van Assche
> said:
BVA> What are the criteria for a prerelease ? I assume that the source
BVA> code should at least build ? Currently both the MinGW and the MSVC
BVA> builds are broken, and two Cygwin regression tests fail.
They should definite
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Wes Hardaker <
[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 12:45:55 +0200, Diego Billi
> said:
>
> DB> Is this patch going to be included in the new 5.6 release? The SVN
> DB> sources do not contain the patch.
>
> I'm behind in getting to ap
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 12:45:55 +0200, Diego Billi said:
DB> Is this patch going to be included in the new 5.6 release? The SVN
DB> sources do not contain the patch.
I'm behind in getting to applying all the needed patches, and I
apologize for that. I intend to review all the outstanding pat
