I get that and respect that :-) It’s of course up to you if that’s possible.
Br, Peter > Op 4 jan. 2016, om 11:25 heeft vinc...@massol.net het volgende geschreven: > > > On 4 Jan 2016 at 11:22:29, Peter Huisman > (p.huis...@ximm.nl(mailto:p.huis...@ximm.nl)) wrote: > >> For us it is very important to have it available in the next 6 release since >> it is a big part of our backup and portability part. I would really >> appreciate it if this could be done :-) > > Note that this issue has been there since XWiki 5.2.4 so it’s not really new > ;) > > Also note that independently of whether we merge it in the 6.4.x branch, you > can always do it for your own version by checking the “Commit” tab in JIRA > and applying the patch to your branch. Of course I understand that it’s > simpler for you if we do it but we need Thomas’s opinion on this (I wouldn’t > want to risk stability of the 6.4.x branch for such an old issue that is not > critical). > > Thanks > -Vincent > >> Br, >> >> Peter >>> Op 4 jan. 2016, om 11:20 heeft vinc...@massol.net het volgende geschreven: >>> >>> Hi Peter, >>> >>> No it’s not been fixed in 6.4.x. Maybe Thomas has decided not to backport >>> it since it could a bit dangerous? Thomas? >>> >>> Thanks >>> -Vincent >>> >>> On 4 Jan 2016 at 11:02:58, Peter Huisman >>> (p.huis...@ximm.nl(mailto:p.huis...@ximm.nl)) wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Vincent, >>>> >>>> Thanks for the prompt response and great to hear that it is already fixed! >>>> I am wondering (since I can’t find it easily) if you also have fixed in >>>> the latest 6.x series since we are not ready to move to 8. >>>> >>>> Br, >>>> >>>> Peter >>>>> Op 4 jan. 2016, om 10:59 heeft >>>>> vinc...@massol.net(mailto:vinc...@massol.net) het volgende geschreven: >>>>> Hi Peter, >>>>> On 4 Jan 2016 at 10:55:49, Peter Huisman >>>>> (p.huis...@ximm.nl(mailto:p.huis...@ximm.nl)(mailto:p.huis...@ximm.nl)) >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> I have a question regarding the import of a XAR. >>>>>> >>>>>> When we do an import of a XAR (exported with the History), we have >>>>>> noticed that - when the document NOT contains an attachment - the >>>>>> version history of the document is identical to the original (obviously >>>>>> as expected). However, when the document contains an attachment, it look >>>>>> like a new version of the document is created with the comment being >>>>>> identical to the last available comment. We have experimented with file >>>>>> an DB store (since we have multiple servers in use with different >>>>>> setups) but that does not solve this issue. >>>>>> >>>>>> 1 - Is this the expected result? >>>>>> 2 - Is there a way to work around this (in our case) unwanted result? >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks in advance for looking at this. >>>>> >>>>> I think you’ve experienced http://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XWIKI-9960 which >>>>> we’ve just fixed. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> -Vincent >>>>> >>>>>> Br, >>>>>> >>>>>> Peter >>> >> > _______________________________________________ users mailing list users@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/users
