>Niklas, I dont see anything wrong with using unique ports for the TFTP
JUnit tests - feel free to commit to the 2.0 branch.
That is, unless Sebb's changes fix the issue.
Rory
Rory Winston wrote:
Hi guys
Re: the original vote thread, these issues have all been resolved (a
number of people pitched in and helped in various ways), so I think we
may be ready to cut another release.
I would also be very keen to just get it out there and fix bugs if and
as occur. Theres nothing approaching a blocker severity in there right
now.
Niklas, I dont see anything wrong with using unique ports for the TFTP
JUnit tests - feel free to commit to the 2.0 branch.
Sebb has applied the patches for the VMS permissioning (which was the
only other significant enhancement outstanding for these releases).
I think we're good to go.
Rory
Niklas Gustavsson wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 8:18 PM, Rahul Akolkar
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/19/08, Niklas Gustavsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I would prefer to get 2.0 out there as well. I would rather see us be
fixing bugs as found by users than keeping it around for even longer
in the current state. It's time to get it out there.
<snip/>
See previous comments on the topic:
http://markmail.org/message/cxyqwzwfsu3xfu4e
Yeah, the issues that are highlighted in that thread must obviously be
fixed. From the thread I understand that Rory already seem to have
addressed some of them. Maybe we need to go through them and verify
that that is the case.
/niklas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
