Hi there,
I wonder if this might be a little late in the game, but would we
consider bumping some of the dependency versions for 1.12?
Off the top of my head, Spring from 5.2.1 to 5.2.3
--Udo
+1
On 2/11/20, 8:42 AM, "Udo Kohlmeyer" wrote:
Hi there,
I wonder if this might be a little late in the game, but would we
consider bumping some of the dependency versions for 1.12?
Off the top of my head, Spring from 5.2.1 to 5.2.3
--Udo
Bumping dependencies is something we normally start just after a release,
to allow ample time to shake out any unforeseen side-effects.
Is the change you are proposing already on develop?
Is there a fix in Spring 5.2.3 that is critical to bring?
On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 9:14 AM Patrick Johnson
w
Nothing critical. This can be pushed to 1.13.
--Udo
On 2/11/20 9:44 AM, Owen Nichols wrote:
Bumping dependencies is something we normally start just after a release,
to allow ample time to shake out any unforeseen side-effects.
Is the change you are proposing already on develop?
Is there a fi
This regression was introduced when the geode-gfsh subproject was recently
added. While not obvious this created a critical build / runtime cycle
between geode-core and geode-gfsh that causes some tools/IDEs, that don't
cope well with circular dependencies, to fail. Additionally no previous
Geode r
+1 for bringing this critical fix to 1.12
> On Feb 11, 2020, at 11:23 AM, Dick Cavender wrote:
>
> This regression was introduced when the geode-gfsh subproject was recently
> added. While not obvious this created a critical build / runtime cycle
> between geode-core and geode-gfsh that causes s
+1
On 2/11/20 11:23 AM, Dick Cavender wrote:
This regression was introduced when the geode-gfsh subproject was recently
added. While not obvious this created a critical build / runtime cycle
between geode-core and geode-gfsh that causes some tools/IDEs, that don't
cope well with circular depende
+1
On Tue, Feb 11, 2020, 11:39 AM Udo Kohlmeyer wrote:
> +1
>
> On 2/11/20 11:23 AM, Dick Cavender wrote:
> > This regression was introduced when the geode-gfsh subproject was
> recently
> > added. While not obvious this created a critical build / runtime cycle
> > between geode-core and geode-g
Geode Developers,
Here's the start of a board report that is due tomorrow (Feb 12).
I feel that the Project Activity or Community Health section could use more
information
about what we're working on. There are so many developers working on so many
exciting areas that I'm not sure which we all feel
Karen, thank you for putting this together. A few things that caught my eye:
- The mission description seem unnecessarily convoluted. Surely there is a
more succinct way to word this.
- The text "The Committer-to-PMC ratio is roughly 7:4” seems to appear in a
great many board reports, despite b
10 matches
Mail list logo
