Felipe Contreras [off-list ref] writes:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 8:08 PM, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Folks interested in working remote-hg, please try it out, so that we
can have a polished one soon after 1.8.3 ships (I am not saying this
round is not polished---I haven't even looked at the patches).
And others, please spend time on testing the 1.8.3-rc2 to make sure
what we are going to ship is free of embarrassing regressions.
If we want folks to test something, it should be the patches I
prepared for 'next' which I just sent.
Yeah, but that is for the release _after_ 1.8.3; I'd rather see
folks help to make sure we have a solid 1.8.3 relaese.
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:
Felipe Contreras [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 8:08 PM, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Folks interested in working remote-hg, please try it out, so that we
can have a polished one soon after 1.8.3 ships (I am not saying this
round is not polished---I haven't even looked at the patches).
And others, please spend time on testing the 1.8.3-rc2 to make sure
what we are going to ship is free of embarrassing regressions.
If we want folks to test something, it should be the patches I
prepared for 'next' which I just sent.
Yeah, but that is for the release _after_ 1.8.3; I'd rather see
folks help to make sure we have a solid 1.8.3 relaese.
That's the intention of the ten patches I sent for 1.8.3. But you said
you are not going to put them in 'master', but in 'next', so I sent
the ones I think should go into next.
So now you have the patches that I think should go into 'master' (10),
and the ones for 'next' (47, including the previous unmerged 10).
--
Felipe Contreras