[zeromq-dev] time for a 3.2 final?

[Lourens Naudé]

Also, zmq_poll() semantics changed from 2.x -> 3.x for when the poll set's
empty. Yes it's a non-sensical use case, but affect's czmq's zloop
implementation and I'm sure there's other cases in the wild where users
would get an error status now for what used to be a no-op / early return.

https://github.com/zeromq/libzmq/pull/403

Thoughts ?

On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 1:13 AM, Lourens Naudé <lourens at methodmissing.com>wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> Took at stab @ fixing LIBZMQ-409 with
> https://github.com/zeromq/zeromq3-x/pull/26 with a backport from
> Crossroads I/O (with some additions) . There's more context added as a
> comment to https://zeromq.jira.com/browse/LIBZMQ-409 .
>
> - Lourens
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 2:03 AM, Pieter Hintjens <ph at imatix.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 4:32 AM, Stefan de Konink <stefan at konink.de>
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, 3 Aug 2012, Chuck Remes wrote:
>> >
>> >> Judging by the "critical issues" on the wiki site, most of them are
>> associated with 2.2. None of the listed tickets are for 3.2.
>> >>
>> >> Is it time to push 3.2rc1 to 3.2 final?
>> >
>> > I still want to provide a test for multipacket pubsub in 3.2. We are
>> still
>> > unable to get any packets through when using an envelope + payload.
>>
>> There's also https://zeromq.jira.com/browse/LIBZMQ-409, which I think
>> we need to address in 3.2 final.
>>
>> I'll cut an rc2, seems about time for that.
>>
>> -Pieter
>> _______________________________________________
>> zeromq-dev mailing list
>> zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org
>> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.zeromq.org/pipermail/zeromq-dev/attachments/20120805/56e86a12/attachment.htm>