similar to: CVS forked into development/stable branches

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 30000 matches similar to: "CVS forked into development/stable branches"

2006 Dec 21
2
Userdb authentication cache
Committed to CVS HEAD already. I think this is small enough change that it won't break anything too badly for v1.0, but I'd like to get some testing first. Here's a patch against branch_1_0 CVS and latest nightly snapshot (looks like they haven't been updating for a while, started building new a new one now): http://dovecot.org/patches/userdb-cache.diff Please try and tell me if
2007 Mar 14
2
Benchmarking CVS HEAD vs. v1.0
Some new features in CVS HEAD are: - v1.0 saves most of the data to dovecot.index.cache only when the client is FETCHing the messages. With mboxes the message headers are saved while parsing the mbox, which is almost the same thing. With CVS HEAD the dovecot.index.cache file is updated already when the new messages are being saved (with deliver or IMAP APPEND). This avoids reading the message
2007 May 19
1
CVS to Mercurial switch
I've been meaning to switch away from CVS for a few years now, but I was never sure what I wanted to switch to, so I kept delaying it. I finally decided yesterday that Mercurial is pretty nice. The Mercurial repository is available from http://hg.dovecot.org/ (has a nice web interface). I wrote a small Mercurial mini-howto below. I'm not a Mercurial expert yet, so if you know better ways
2007 May 19
1
CVS to Mercurial switch
I've been meaning to switch away from CVS for a few years now, but I was never sure what I wanted to switch to, so I kept delaying it. I finally decided yesterday that Mercurial is pretty nice. The Mercurial repository is available from http://hg.dovecot.org/ (has a nice web interface). I wrote a small Mercurial mini-howto below. I'm not a Mercurial expert yet, so if you know better ways
2007 Jan 21
2
Wrong configure.in entry in CVS branch_1_0
This line in configure.in src/plugins/mail-log/Makefile refers to a non existing direcory in the branch_1_0 tree, which breaks build. ciao Luca
2016 Apr 13
1
v2.3 development tree forked in git
The git master branch starts tracking Dovecot v2.3 development from now on. There are soon going to be several API changes there that might break plugins. If you wish to keep tracking latest v2.2.x development instead, switch to master-2.2 branch. The nightly releases at http://dovecot.org/nightly/ will also track v2.3 tree.
2016 Apr 13
1
v2.3 development tree forked in git
The git master branch starts tracking Dovecot v2.3 development from now on. There are soon going to be several API changes there that might break plugins. If you wish to keep tracking latest v2.2.x development instead, switch to master-2.2 branch. The nightly releases at http://dovecot.org/nightly/ will also track v2.3 tree.
2005 Mar 02
3
cvs stable and 1.0.5
I see that 1.0.5 is out. I thought that if I am tracking cvs v1.0.x I would always get the newest releases. However, I just did a fresh update and install from cvs stable and it reports as only being v1.0.3. Should I just be using the tarballs rather than the cvs -r 1_0? Or maybe my initial cvs was incorrect? Thanks! -- -M There are 10 kinds of people in this world: Those who can count in
2005 Jan 31
2
dovecot-stable branch
To confuse Dovecot versioning even more, I've added "dovecot-stable" module into CVS. This is a version of Dovecot before the recent keyword changes but with several bugfixes backported to it. It's thought to be mostly stable. I intend to keep it updated with important bugfixes and with other simple bugfixes. Although I'm not sure if I'll make a large code base upgrade
2007 Feb 06
3
1.0.rc22 released
http://dovecot.org/releases/dovecot-1.0.rc22.tar.gz http://dovecot.org/releases/dovecot-1.0.rc22.tar.gz.sig Found another bad bug in rc19 changes. Wonder why my imaptest catched the bug only in CVS HEAD but not in branch_1_0 even though both had it. Anyway, now the imaptest runs nicely for both, and I'm again optimistic that the bug count is low enough for v1.0 to be released soon :) BTW. My
2007 Feb 06
3
1.0.rc22 released
http://dovecot.org/releases/dovecot-1.0.rc22.tar.gz http://dovecot.org/releases/dovecot-1.0.rc22.tar.gz.sig Found another bad bug in rc19 changes. Wonder why my imaptest catched the bug only in CVS HEAD but not in branch_1_0 even though both had it. Anyway, now the imaptest runs nicely for both, and I'm again optimistic that the bug count is low enough for v1.0 to be released soon :) BTW. My
2007 Jan 25
4
Benchmarking
I wasted too much time today doing this, but they do show a few interesting things: 1) mmap_disable=yes is faster than mmap_disable=no. I didn't expect this. I'm not yet sure why this is, but possibly because then it updates the mail index by reading the changes from dovecot.index.log, instead of reopening and re-mmaping dovecot.index. At least that's the biggest difference between
2006 Jul 03
0
RE: [dovecot-cvs] dovecot/src/lib-storage/index index-mail.c, 1.102, 1.103
Woops... yep, that was the problem. Sorry. Bill On Mon, July 3, 2006 10:08 am, Timo Sirainen <tss at iki.fi> said: > Are you sure you're not just mixing changes to CVS HEAD and branch_1_0? > CVS HEAD was broken for days before this patch fixed it. > > On Mon, 2006-07-03 at 09:59 -0400, Bill Boebel wrote: >Fyi, after this patch I started seeing the error below: >
2005 Oct 30
2
Dovecot 30.10.2005 CVS Snapshot: cannot connect to MySQL
Hello, I've compiled nightly CVS snapshot and set it up to work with MySQL database: [...] auth default { mechanisms = plain user = root passdb sql { args = /usr/local/dovecot/etc/sql.conf } userdb sql { args = /usr/local/dovecot/etc/sql.conf } } sql.conf contains next line: connect = host=localhost
2005 Sep 01
1
TE406P seg fault on Stable
I received a TE406P card from Digium yesterday and have done several tests on it and cannot get it working reliably with any Stable release or even CVS v1.0. What are other people that are using the TE406P card using for an Asterisk version? I tried 1.2.0 beta1 and it seemed to function well except for an unrelated issue with the beta release where the manager interface chokes under
2007 Mar 18
1
Login processes and a new performance/security compromise [was: Re: pre-1.0.rc27: Index and mbox fixes]
On Sat, March 17, 2007 10:51 pm, Timo Sirainen <tss at iki.fi> said: > Oh, and as for when the rewrite is in CVS, I'm not really sure. I'm > still wondering if I should put it there soon and make the release after > v1.0 be v2.0, or if I should first stabilize the current new CVS HEAD > features (which shouldn't take too long), do a v1.2 release and only > then
2006 Aug 23
0
bug? order dependencies in branch_1_0 conf file
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 bldg dovecot cvs branch_1_0 on osx, i'm seeing a sensitivity to order in protocol statements. e.g., on launch: THIS WORKS FINE: protocol lda { sendmail_path = /usr/local/exim/bin/exim ... plugin { quota = maildir:storage=10240 # 10 MB quota limit } } but, THIS DOES NOT protocol lda { ... plugin { quota =
2003 Jul 15
2
divide by zero and CVS version stability
Hello everyone, I recently stumbled upon an issue in the encoder of the v1.0 SDK. At the end of each encoding session a divide by zero (D=0) happens in bark_noise_hybridmp (psy.c:642). This causes a crash on Win9x systems (WinNT seems to handle this fine by using infinite as the result). My encoding code is almost identical to the encoder_example, so I'm reasonably sure that this is not a
2006 Nov 02
3
v1.0 plans, rc11 tomorrow
As you can probably guess from my today's burst of activity, I'm no longer extremely busy. Actually it looks like for the next 3-4 weeks I don't have anything especially time consuming to do. So it's time to get Dovecot v1.0 released :) I've now read all the mails from this list again, and it looks like pretty much the only problems with rc10 was the mbox assert crash, which
2005 Jun 04
4
Dovecot development status v1.0
Timo, Regarding: http://www.dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2005-January/006144.html I would like an estimate of where you are on the path to a released (dovecot-1.0). I have read your statement regarding the -stable series and am wondering when we see the first feature complete -beta of v1.0? Thank for your hard efforts. I have been a happy customer for about a year. Ray