On 03.12.2012 11:13, Mark Thomas wrote:
> There isn't much in the 7.0.x change log but it is the start of the
> month so I'm starting the 7.0.34 release process. The plan, as always is:
> - fix any open bugs
> - check the unit tests and TCKs
> - tag
> - vote
> - hopefully release
>
> Best guess ri
On 12/3/2012 5:39 AM, Rainer Jung wrote:
On 03.12.2012 12:27, Jess Holle wrote:
On 12/3/2012 5:09 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
On 03/12/2012 11:00, Konstantin Kolinko wrote:
1. I think we need to switch over to the recently released Daemon
1.0.11.
There is a regression that needs to be fixed. I thi
On 03.12.2012 12:27, Jess Holle wrote:
> On 12/3/2012 5:09 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
>> On 03/12/2012 11:00, Konstantin Kolinko wrote:
>>> 1. I think we need to switch over to the recently released Daemon
>>> 1.0.11.
>> There is a regression that needs to be fixed. I think we should wait for
>> 1.0.12
On 12/3/2012 5:09 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
On 03/12/2012 11:00, Konstantin Kolinko wrote:
1. I think we need to switch over to the recently released Daemon 1.0.11.
There is a regression that needs to be fixed. I think we should wait for
1.0.12.
Can you elaborate on the regression? [Having just m
On 03/12/2012 11:00, Konstantin Kolinko wrote:
> 2012/12/3 Mark Thomas :
>> There isn't much in the 7.0.x change log but it is the start of the
>> month so I'm starting the 7.0.34 release process. The plan, as always is:
>> - fix any open bugs
>> - check the unit tests and TCKs
>> - tag
>> - vote
>
2012/12/3 Mark Thomas :
> There isn't much in the 7.0.x change log but it is the start of the
> month so I'm starting the 7.0.34 release process. The plan, as always is:
> - fix any open bugs
> - check the unit tests and TCKs
> - tag
> - vote
> - hopefully release
>
> Best guess right now is that I
