I filed an issue for the problem discussed here:
https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/issues/659
- Sijie
On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Charan Reddy G
wrote:
> Sure Sijie and Ivan. It sounds appropriate.
>
> Thanks,
> Charan
>
> On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 1:00 AM, Sijie Guo wrote:
>
>> Yes, we
On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Enrico Olivelli
wrote:
> Il mar 24 ott 2017, 18:44 Sijie Guo ha scritto:
>
> > Enrico,
> >
> > I had a comment in the way how you split the changes. If you split the
> > changes by features, do you really need create branches on main repo for
> > sending reviews?
Sure Sijie and Ivan. It sounds appropriate.
Thanks,
Charan
On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 1:00 AM, Sijie Guo wrote:
> Yes, we should fix this ASAP.
>
> Charan, what is your opinion on the fix?
>
> - Sijie
>
> On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 12:12 AM, Ivan Kelly wrote:
>
>> > Use the approach that I used befo
Il mar 24 ott 2017, 18:44 Sijie Guo ha scritto:
> Enrico,
>
> I had a comment in the way how you split the changes. If you split the
> changes by features, do you really need create branches on main repo for
> sending reviews? I don't see any updates to my comments though.
>
I apologize Sijie, I
Enrico,
I had a comment in the way how you split the changes. If you split the
changes by features, do you really need create branches on main repo for
sending reviews? I don't see any updates to my comments though.
I would suggest us thinking carefully before using share branches, or at
least un
I would prefix it with your username, so eolivello/issue--part-
-Ivan
On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 5:23 PM, Enrico Olivelli wrote:
> Sijie, Ivan and/or other PMC
>
> I would like to create branches on shared Apache repo in order to create
> the chain of Pull Requests.
> I think we should agre
Sijie, Ivan and/or other PMC
I would like to create branches on shared Apache repo in order to create
the chain of Pull Requests.
I think we should agree on a naming convention
What about
issue-471-x
issue-471-y
issue-471-z
where xx is a local name which describes better the inte
Yes, we should fix this ASAP.
Charan, what is your opinion on the fix?
- Sijie
On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 12:12 AM, Ivan Kelly wrote:
> > Use the approach that I used before (as in the old commits at twitter’s
> > branch). Ledger storage is responsible for instantiating the checkpoints.
> I would
> Use the approach that I used before (as in the old commits at twitter’s
> branch). Ledger storage is responsible for instantiating the checkpoints.
I would go with this approach. It was probably me that asked for the
changes in the other direction before, but I can't remember why I
asked for them
