On Dec 21, 2007 5:12 AM, Xavier <shiningxc@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 11:53:24PM -0600, Dan McGee wrote:
We are close to release, folks. Anything else outstanding that is critical?
Hm well, nothing critical, but I thought there were several things that needed to be taken care of before the release, and not much happened during these last two weeks (sorry, I didn't have much time).
1) not important, easy to fix:
* -Ru patch from Nagy is ready for quite a while, and it doesn't change any existing behavior, it just adds a new feature (however, it adds a new message to be translated) -> my unneeded branch
I'll try to look at this the next few days, and plan accordingly. Maybe this would be better in a 3.1.1 release?
2) more important, easy to fix:
* testdb is broken I fixed this on my testdb branch, and also added conflicts checking. nothing intrusive.
I pulled the bugfix patch, and I'll consider the other stuff sometime as well.
* one memleak from Nathan was apparently ignored : http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2007-December/0104 and also, a little and good patch for ignorepkg : http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2007-December/0104
both pushed to my working branch
Both pulled to my working branch now (your links got cut off too btw).
3) important, hard to fix:
* the backup handling is in a poor situation : http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2007-December/010439.html
http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2007-December/003868.html (with 3.1 , reinstalling filesystem makes the .pacnew appear though)
* another weird issue with directory symlinks http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2007-December/010451.html
these two areas are my favorites (read: this really pisses me off).
I know we have problems here, but as far as I can tell, we don't have regressions. Correct me if I'm wrong. Regressions are show-stoppers, but problems are not (if they were, we would never be able to release). -Dan