On Mon, Apr 7, 2025 at 1:10 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 03, 2025 at 12:36:59AM +0900, Ryo Kanbayashi wrote:
> > I'll reflect your notice and suggestion to the patch current I'm
> > working on :)
>
> Thanks for that.
>
> And I have forgotten to add you as a reviewer of what has been
>
On Thu, Apr 03, 2025 at 12:36:59AM +0900, Ryo Kanbayashi wrote:
> I'll reflect your notice and suggestion to the patch current I'm
> working on :)
Thanks for that.
And I have forgotten to add you as a reviewer of what has been
committed as 2c7bd2ba507e. Sorry for that :/
--
Michael
signature.a
On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 04:26:27PM -0500, Andrew Jackson wrote:
> I am working on a feature adjacent to the connection service functionality
> and noticed some issues with the tests introduced in this thread. Basically
> they incorrectly invoke the append perl function by passing multiple
> strings
On Tue, Apr 1, 2025 at 6:26 AM Andrew Jackson
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am working on a feature adjacent to the connection service functionality
> and noticed some issues with the tests introduced in this thread. Basically
> they incorrectly invoke the append perl function by passing multiple strings
Hi,
I am working on a feature adjacent to the connection service functionality
and noticed some issues with the tests introduced in this thread. Basically
they incorrectly invoke the append perl function by passing multiple
strings to append when the function only takes one string to append. This
On Sat, Mar 29, 2025 at 3:35 PM Ryo Kanbayashi wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2025 at 8:57 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
> > > I am not sure that I'll have the time to look at 0002 for this release
> > > cycle, could it be possible to get a rebase for it?
> > Here is a simple rebase that I have been able t
On Fri, Mar 28, 2025 at 10:44 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2025 at 06:31:14PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > With all that in mind and more documentation added to the test, I've
> > applied 0001, so let's see what the buildfarm has to say. The CI was
> > stable, so it's a star
On Thu, Mar 27, 2025 at 06:31:14PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> With all that in mind and more documentation added to the test, I've
> applied 0001, so let's see what the buildfarm has to say. The CI was
> stable, so it's a start.
The buildfarm (particularly the Windows members that worried me
On Thu, Mar 27, 2025 at 06:31:14PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> I am not sure that I'll have the time to look at 0002 for this release
> cycle, could it be possible to get a rebase for it?
Here is a simple rebase that I have been able to assemble this
morning. I won't have the space to review
On Sun, Mar 23, 2025 at 12:32:03PM +0900, Ryo Kanbayashi wrote:
> Additional test scripts have been merged to a single script ^^ b
I have spent quite a bit of time on the review 0001 with the new
tests to get something in for this release, and there was quite a bit
going on there:
- The script sho
On Sat, Mar 22, 2025 at 4:46 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 06:16:44PM +0900, Ryo Kanbayashi wrote:
> > Sorry, I found a miss on 006_service.pl.
> > Fixed patch is attached...
>
> Please note that the commit fest app needs all the patches of a a set
> to be posted in the sam
On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 06:16:44PM +0900, Ryo Kanbayashi wrote:
> Sorry, I found a miss on 006_service.pl.
> Fixed patch is attached...
Please note that the commit fest app needs all the patches of a a set
to be posted in the same message. In this case, v2-0001 is not going
to get automatic test
12 matches
Mail list logo
