Re: Info needed in 1.6.x STATUS file

2010-06-16 Thread Kamesh Jayachandran
On 06/15/2010 10:51 PM, Julian Foad wrote: Hi devs. Going through the 1.6.x. STATUS file, I am finding some items that could do with a better description or justification to make it easier to evaluate them. Can anyone provide information on the following: * r934599, r934603 Fix a c

Re: Info needed in 1.6.x STATUS file

2010-06-15 Thread Daniel Shahaf
Julian Foad wrote on Tue, 15 Jun 2010 at 20:21 -: > Hi devs. Going through the 1.6.x. STATUS file, I am finding some items > that could do with a better description or justification to make it > easier to evaluate them. Can anyone provide information on the > following: > > > > * r934599,

Re: Info needed in 1.6.x STATUS file

2010-06-15 Thread Paul Burba
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Julian Foad wrote: > Hi devs.  Going through the 1.6.x. STATUS file, I am finding some items > that could do with a better description or justification to make it > easier to evaluate them.  Can anyone provide information on the > following: > > >>  * r934599, r934

Re: Info needed in 1.6.x STATUS file

2010-06-15 Thread Hyrum K. Wright
These are all good questions, and I would suggest that whoever answers them does so in the STATUS file, rather than just on list. Cheers, -Hyrum On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 12:21 PM, Julian Foad wrote: > Hi devs.  Going through the 1.6.x. STATUS file, I am finding some items > that could do with a b

Info needed in 1.6.x STATUS file

2010-06-15 Thread Julian Foad
Hi devs. Going through the 1.6.x. STATUS file, I am finding some items that could do with a better description or justification to make it easier to evaluate them. Can anyone provide information on the following: > * r934599, r934603 >Fix a concurrency issue in the FSFS rep-cache code. Th