Replies: 6 comments 7 replies
-
I just pushed a PR to solve timeline synchronization on 4.1.x, as you
asked. I think you can include.
Em ter., 27 de jun. de 2023 15:24, Wladimir Leite ***@***.***>
escreveu:
… Great!
Including #1647 <#1647>, #1287
<#1287> and #1636
<#1636> seems fine.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1733 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG247S24RYDBWRVXHT2BQPDXNMXPVANCNFSM6AAAAAAZWAW2MY>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Seems good to me. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Since we are including some enhancements, should we also include #1525 and #1633? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
If it is because of it being a minor version, the #1633 changes more the behavior, but to me it is okay to include both. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
@tc-wleite I saw after merging #1651, you sent some fixing PRs. Could you help pointing which of them should I copy to 4.1.x? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
All devs,
I plan to release a 4.1.3 version this week, since we have important fixes done. This are the current release notes:
https://github.com/sepinf-inc/IPED/blob/4.1.x/ReleaseNotes.txt
I'm going to include #1706 and possibly #1693. Since I included some improvements, should we include other enhancements, like #1647 , #1287, #1636, any other? Opinions @tc-wleite, @hauck-jvsh, @patrickdalla?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions