Re: [PATCH] don't print GeoIP country if not defined

2012-04-28 Thread Robert Spier
On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 8:39 AM, Matt Simerson wrote: > > On Apr 22, 2012, at 11:45 PM, Robert Spier wrote: > > > This change contains a bunch of unnecessary whitespace changes. This > can make it hard to trace back to original changes. I'm not saying there's > not a need for a whitespace clea

Re: [PATCH] prepend auth_flat plugin name to $note

2012-04-28 Thread Robert Spier
On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Matt Simerson wrote: > > On Apr 22, 2012, at 11:43 PM, Robert Spier wrote: > > > On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Matt Simerson wrote: > > > >> Makes it much easier to figure out where that log entry came from. > >> --- > >> t/plugin_tests/auth/auth_flat_file |

Re: [PATCH] don't print GeoIP country if not defined

2012-04-28 Thread Matt Simerson
On Apr 28, 2012, at 10:48 AM, Robert Spier wrote: > On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 8:39 AM, Matt Simerson wrote: > >> >> On Apr 22, 2012, at 11:45 PM, Robert Spier wrote: >> >>> This change contains a bunch of unnecessary whitespace changes. This >> can make it hard to trace back to original chang

future directions

2012-04-28 Thread Robert Spier
> > > > Maybe the time has come to "do a release" (0.9?) and then open things up > > for major cleanups/changes. > This might actually be 0.85, but that's irrelevant. > > > > -R > > I'm all in favor. > > I'm doing more work on plugins right now and have a bunch more changes in > the pipes. Most

Re: future directions

2012-04-28 Thread Matt Simerson
> I'm all in favor. > > I'm doing more work on plugins right now and have a bunch more changes in the > pipes. Most of the changes revolve around several practices which I think all > plugins should adhere to: > > One thing that would help is if you could split your changes into multiple > pu

Re: future directions

2012-04-28 Thread Ask Bjørn Hansen
On Apr 28, 2012, at 13:41, Robert Spier wrote: > One thing that would help is if you could split your changes into multiple > pull requests -- if we're going to try using github as our mechanism, every > pull request should be for one "feature". There's a lot of your changes > pending right now

Re: future directions

2012-04-28 Thread Robert Spier
On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Ask Bjørn Hansen wrote: > On Apr 28, 2012, at 13:41, Robert Spier wrote: > > > One thing that would help is if you could split your changes into > multiple > > pull requests -- if we're going to try using github as our mechanism, > every > > pull request should be