It's the same number of patches.
On 23 Sep 2015 4:42 am, "Matt Riedemann" wrote:
>
>
> On 9/22/2015 4:59 AM, Alan Pevec wrote:
>
>> 2015-09-21 16:12 GMT+02:00 Monty Taylor :
>>
>>> We're running a script right now to submit a change to every project with
>>> this change. The topic will be coverag
On 9/22/2015 4:59 AM, Alan Pevec wrote:
2015-09-21 16:12 GMT+02:00 Monty Taylor :
We're running a script right now to submit a change to every project with
this change. The topic will be coverage-v4
stable/kilo has uncapped coverage>=3.6 do we patch-spam it or cap coverage?
stable/juno has c
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015, at 02:59 AM, Alan Pevec wrote:
> 2015-09-21 16:12 GMT+02:00 Monty Taylor :
> > We're running a script right now to submit a change to every project with
> > this change. The topic will be coverage-v4
>
> stable/kilo has uncapped coverage>=3.6 do we patch-spam it or cap
> cove
On 2015-09-22 11:59:44 +0200 (+0200), Alan Pevec wrote:
> stable/kilo has uncapped coverage>=3.6 do we patch-spam it or cap coverage?
> stable/juno has coverage>=3.6,<=3.7.1
There's nothing wrong with updating it there, but unless we're
actively running coverage jobs on those branches I'm not conv
2015-09-21 16:12 GMT+02:00 Monty Taylor :
> We're running a script right now to submit a change to every project with
> this change. The topic will be coverage-v4
stable/kilo has uncapped coverage>=3.6 do we patch-spam it or cap coverage?
stable/juno has coverage>=3.6,<=3.7.1
Cheers,
Alan
__
