Clojurians
#cljs-dev
<
2018-09-21
>

This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.

dnolen18:09:01

any simple tickets for me to consider?

dnolen18:09:11

I still need to wrap up the fingerprinting one

mfikes18:09:28

Are you still in the mode of achieving closure for a release?

dnolen18:09:06

I don’t think we’ll be able to release today - but if there’s some easy stuff for me to get in I’m happy to look at it

dnolen18:09:21

but yes - tickets that would be good to include

dnolen18:09:28

(in the next release)

mfikes18:09:52

Right. The only things I've seen recently that really have no chance of breaking things are probably some of the recent newbie tickets (especially if any are just docstring updates.)

mfikes18:09:57

Checking...

mfikes18:09:30

Hah, maybe there are no such tickets. These recent ones are fairly close to trivial, but aren't really that impactful, and could theoretically break things (if you take a pessimistic view): https://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJS-2916 https://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJS-2911 https://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJS-2912 https://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJS-2729

dnolen18:09:31

@mfikes CA status on 2729?

dnolen18:09:40

I don’t see Eugene Kostenko in the list

dnolen18:09:44

CLJS-2911 seems safe?

mfikes18:09:49

Yep, I just assigned it to him to ask about that.

mfikes18:09:41

The safety of CLJS-2911 seems to derive from it being in Clojure (vetted there too), and the fact that it passes all of the Canary tests.

dnolen18:09:58

yeah going to apply that one