On 04/06/16 07:17, Selva Nair wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Selva Nair <selva.n...@gmail.com > <mailto:selva.n...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Gert Doering <g...@greenie.muc.de > <mailto:g...@greenie.muc.de>> wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 07:49:23PM +0200, David Sommerseth wrote: > > From: David Sommerseth <d...@privateinternetaccess.com > <mailto:d...@privateinternetaccess.com>> > > > > Continuing to fix breakage caused by commit 40cb4cfc5d011102. > [..] > > Not having actually tested this, looking at it seems to properly > quote > the bits that caused buildbot explosion and "make dist" fails > (also as > discussed between David and Samuli on IRC). > > So - ACK! Please apply and let's make the buildbots all green > again :-) > > > Don't know about bots, at least one human cross-compiling for > windows is happy now.. > > > The joy was short-lived. mingw cross-compile from release/2.3 tarball is > also broken: > > error: cannot find input file: `vendor/Makefile.in' > > Thankfully, cherry-pick 41ab12f06253c fixes it.
Whoops! I completely forgot to include this fix into the release/2.3 branch. > IMO, the unit testing patches shouldn't have been merged into the > release branch I did think consider this, but ended up applying them to release/2.3 as well. My thought is that once we start having more unit tests included, we should be able to at least add some of those tests to the release/2.3 branch too. There are code which is refactored so much it won't be easy to do, but there are also plenty of code which haven't changed that dramatically. I see these first patches from Jens as framework (or infrastructure) patches, it doesn't mean we commit ourselves to adding unit-testing to release/2.3, but it gives the possibility to do so. Our 2.3 releases will continue to live in parallel with the future 2.4 release for quite some time. -- kind regards, David Sommerseth
