On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 1:51 AM Nathan Hartman <hartman.nat...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 7:00 PM Johan Corveleyn <jcor...@apache.org> wrote: > > Just as a heads up: I was ready to vote for an approve r1880192 (issue > > #4862 -- Merge: the resulting mergeinfo is non-deterministic) for > > 1.14.x, but as Yasuhito also discovered: there is an EOL issue in the > > test, which makes it fail on Windows. So it really needs to be > > accompanied by the r1881985 group. > > > > If anyone can add a third vote to the r1881985 group, they get the > > other approval as a bonus :-). > > > > (cc'ing Julian and Nathan personally, because they have voted already > > for the first issue, so already know the context) > > Thanks for the heads up and all your work to push this train forward. > > Yes, the r1881985 group fixes a test that was added in r1880192. > (Probably it should have been grouped with r1880192 in STATUS, but > since they have different combinations of votes, I'm leaving them > separate.) > > I added my vote to the r1881985 group, approving. Accordingly I > converted your vote on r1880192 to +1 and moved both groups to > Approved together. > > Done in separate commits r1884596, r1884597, r1884598. > > The above is for 1.14.x; I haven't done 1.10.x yet...
Just a heads up, I have finally done the same for 1.10.x, likewise in 3 separate commits: * r1885947 (my vote for the r1881985 group) * r1885948 (upgrade Johan's vote for r1880192 per earlier conversations) * r1885949 (move both groups to Approved) Cheers, Nathan
