Re: svn commit: r1684161 - /subversion/branches/1.9.x/STATUS

2015-06-08 Thread Branko Čibej
On 08.06.2015 15:37, Ivan Zhakov wrote: > I didn't think that any test suite failure should be called as release > blocker and after thinking more I agree that this particular failure > also should not be considered as blocker. Even it breaks my release > testing scripts, since failure in one confi

Re: svn commit: r1684161 - /subversion/branches/1.9.x/STATUS

2015-06-08 Thread Ivan Zhakov
On 8 June 2015 at 16:22, Branko Čibej wrote: > On 08.06.2015 14:53, Ivan Zhakov wrote: >> On 8 June 2015 at 14:37, Branko Čibej wrote: >>> On 08.06.2015 13:33, i...@apache.org wrote: Author: ivan Date: Mon Jun 8 11:33:42 2015 New Revision: 1684161 URL: http://svn.apache.

Re: svn commit: r1684161 - /subversion/branches/1.9.x/STATUS

2015-06-08 Thread Branko Čibej
On 08.06.2015 14:53, Ivan Zhakov wrote: > On 8 June 2015 at 14:37, Branko Čibej wrote: >> On 08.06.2015 13:33, i...@apache.org wrote: >>> Author: ivan >>> Date: Mon Jun 8 11:33:42 2015 >>> New Revision: 1684161 >>> >>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1684161 >>> Log: >>> * STATUS: Nominate r1684034 a

Re: svn commit: r1684161 - /subversion/branches/1.9.x/STATUS

2015-06-08 Thread Ivan Zhakov
On 8 June 2015 at 14:37, Branko Čibej wrote: > On 08.06.2015 13:33, i...@apache.org wrote: >> Author: ivan >> Date: Mon Jun 8 11:33:42 2015 >> New Revision: 1684161 >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1684161 >> Log: >> * STATUS: Nominate r1684034 as release blocker. > > > Ivan, a minor bug in the

Re: svn commit: r1684161 - /subversion/branches/1.9.x/STATUS

2015-06-08 Thread Branko Čibej
On 08.06.2015 13:33, i...@apache.org wrote: > Author: ivan > Date: Mon Jun 8 11:33:42 2015 > New Revision: 1684161 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1684161 > Log: > * STATUS: Nominate r1684034 as release blocker. Ivan, a minor bug in the test suite isn't a release blocker by any stretch of imagin