I think that is ok, especially if the issues will be linked.
On Apr 5, 2012, at 12:03 PM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
> It seems that the JGroups refactoring in Search done to share a single
> Channel resolved a critical problem, but I wasn't aware of it.
>
> Would it make sense to open an "after th
On 5 avr. 2012, at 12:03, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
> Would it make sense to open an "after the fact" issue and mark it
> solved for the already-released 4.1.0.Final ?
Sure
___
hibernate-dev mailing list
hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.o
It seems that the JGroups refactoring in Search done to share a single
Channel resolved a critical problem, but I wasn't aware of it.
Would it make sense to open an "after the fact" issue and mark it
solved for the already-released 4.1.0.Final ?
It was embarrassingly wrong, but now that it's solv
