Best work with Nick on timing.
Fixing the 3.3 to 3.4 upgrade problem would be great, but it must be an outlier as this is the only person with such a bug report. On the other hand, if fixed shortly after release, it would be a reason to do again a release.... I leave it up to you.


2013/11/5 Jerome <>


We can plan it for end of the week? Friday ?
Note, I can try to use git.

I already moved some bug reports to 4.0.3.

But maybe some remaining issues[1] can be fixed before 4.0.2 release?
Or need to wait a fix for 6194: 
    Database corrupted - TypeError: unhashable type: 'list'[2].

Any idea for the release name[3]?

[2] in the code of upgrade, or in the code of 3.3, there is no unserialize on raw data. 6194


Le mar. 5 nov. 2013 at 20:06,Benny Malengier <> a écrit :

2013/11/5 Nick Hall <>
On 05/11/13 12:55, Vassilii Khachaturov wrote:
> On 05.11.2013 14:50, Nick Hall wrote:
>> >We need a new mount point to use for git (svn uses "code").  I suggest
>> >"core".
>> >
>> >So we would have the following url:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >Is this OK?
>> >
> Wouldn't the virtual server different "Host: " header suffice to
> differentiate between the svn and git? maybe you can keep /code for the
> git URL?
> Not a big issue anyway.

I tried using "code", but it is actually the mount point, so I got an error.

I'll use "source" instead.

Should 4.0.2 not be released first, before git changes are done?
Jerome,  I was thinking the 3.4 release would have been followed by that. Is 4.0.2 not planned?



November Webinars for C, C++, Fortran Developers
Accelerate application performance with scalable programming models. Explore
techniques for threading, error checking, porting, and tuning. Get the most
from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register
Gramps-devel mailing list