Aaron Bentley wrote:
> John A Meinel wrote:
>> We aren't strictly blocked on bundles, because we've switched to using
>> launchpad code review for the primary method.
>
> Bundles are the primary way I use launchpad code review. I consider the
> bundle breakage a very bad thing.
>
> This also doesn't consider other projects that are using Bundle Buggy.
> It doesn't consider other projects that are using bundles generally.
>
> Aaron
*Other* projects don't cause *bzr* to not dogfood 2a. This isn't about
upgrading everyone, but about upgrading bzr.dev.
I agree, the bundle breakage is *very bad* and is a critical fix that
must be done before we release 2.0. But that isn't what this bug is about.
John
=:->
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Aaron Bentley wrote:
> John A Meinel wrote:
>> We aren't strictly blocked on bundles, because we've switched to using
>> launchpad code review for the primary method.
>
> Bundles are the primary way I use launchpad code review. I consider the
> bundle breakage a very bad thing.
>
> This also doesn't consider other projects that are using Bundle Buggy.
> It doesn't consider other projects that are using bundles generally.
>
> Aaron
*Other* projects don't cause *bzr* to not dogfood 2a. This isn't about
upgrading everyone, but about upgrading bzr.dev.
I agree, the bundle breakage is *very bad* and is a critical fix that
must be done before we release 2.0. But that isn't what this bug is about.
John enigmail. mozdev. org/
=:->
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://
iEYEARECAAYFAkp nP/MACgkQJdeBCY SNAAPnfQCgrvS6n Z2J23DB4SuMPUIA OBHe dOIM+PuE5bKYYRv PKBRJdQ
+I8AoNLl3/
=Nkdt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----