On 23/06/15 11:29 +0100, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
On 22 June 2015 at 19:14, aconway wrote:
On Tue, 2015-06-16 at 23:38 -0400, Rafael Schloming wrote:
I'd like to get the proton-j-reactor branch into 0.10 also. It should
be
ready soon, so if py3k can be sorted and merged in a similar
timeframe we
On Tue, 2015-06-23 at 17:48 +0200, Flavio Percoco wrote:
> On 22/06/15 14:14 -0400, aconway wrote:
> > On Tue, 2015-06-16 at 23:38 -0400, Rafael Schloming wrote:
> > > I'd like to get the proton-j-reactor branch into 0.10 also. It
> > > should
> > > be
> > > ready soon, so if py3k can be sorted an
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 9:10 AM, Flavio Percoco wrote:
> On 17/06/15 08:19 -0400, Ken Giusti wrote:
>
>> Re: py3k - I think we're really close - I've rebased my local
>> kgiusti-python3 to latest trunk, and have a few bugs to sort out but I
>> don't think that will take too long.
>>
>> The one mi
On 22/06/15 14:14 -0400, aconway wrote:
On Tue, 2015-06-16 at 23:38 -0400, Rafael Schloming wrote:
I'd like to get the proton-j-reactor branch into 0.10 also. It should
be
ready soon, so if py3k can be sorted and merged in a similar
timeframe we
could target a release for the end of the month.
On 06/23/2015 11:29 AM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
I'd say the same for most large additions if they aren't needed to
complete / round out other changes already made for the next release.
I think we tend to be guilty of putting everything in together,
resulting in a big release that can then drag on a
On 22 June 2015 at 19:14, aconway wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-06-16 at 23:38 -0400, Rafael Schloming wrote:
>> I'd like to get the proton-j-reactor branch into 0.10 also. It should
>> be
>> ready soon, so if py3k can be sorted and merged in a similar
>> timeframe we
>> could target a release for the end
On Tue, 2015-06-16 at 23:38 -0400, Rafael Schloming wrote:
> I'd like to get the proton-j-reactor branch into 0.10 also. It should
> be
> ready soon, so if py3k can be sorted and merged in a similar
> timeframe we
> could target a release for the end of the month.
The C++ and Go bindings are als
vio Percoco"
To: "Rafael Schloming"
Cc: users@qpid.apache.org, pro...@qpid.apache.org
Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2015 2:20:09 AM
Subject: Re: Can we release proton 0.10? Can we add Py3K to that release?
On 16/06/15 23:38 -0400, Rafael Schloming wrote:
>I'd like to get the p
2015 2:20:09 AM
> Subject: Re: Can we release proton 0.10? Can we add Py3K to that release?
>
> On 16/06/15 23:38 -0400, Rafael Schloming wrote:
> >I'd like to get the proton-j-reactor branch into 0.10 also. It should be
> >ready
> >soon, so if py3k can be sorte
On 16/06/15 23:38 -0400, Rafael Schloming wrote:
I'd like to get the proton-j-reactor branch into 0.10 also. It should be ready
soon, so if py3k can be sorted and merged in a similar timeframe we could
target a release for the end of the month.
This sounds awesome, I think it can be done based
I'd like to get the proton-j-reactor branch into 0.10 also. It should be
ready soon, so if py3k can be sorted and merged in a similar timeframe we
could target a release for the end of the month.
--Rafael
On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 3:32 PM, Flavio Percoco wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> I've been looking
Greetings,
I've been looking with great pleasure all the progress happening in
proton lately and I was wondering whether it'd be possible to have an
0.10 release cut soon.
There are some bugfixes I'm personally interested in but also some
important changes (specifically in the python bindings) t
12 matches
Mail list logo
