OpenVMS build -> GNV: LDAP Changes

RESOLVED FIXED in mozilla1.3

Status

Directory
LDAP C SDK
--
blocker
RESOLVED FIXED
16 years ago
15 years ago

People

(Reporter: Colin Blake, Assigned: mcs)

Tracking

other
mozilla1.3
DEC
OpenVMS

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)

Details

Attachments

(1 attachment)

(Reporter)

Description

16 years ago
This bug report will track the LDAP changes with the "move OpenVMS build to GNV"
work (meta-bug 180288).
(Reporter)

Comment 1

16 years ago
Created attachment 106353 [details] [diff] [review]
LDAP changes
(Reporter)

Comment 2

16 years ago
Mark, could you start the review process please, and tell me how many levels of
review I need for LDAP modules. Thanks.
(Assignee)

Comment 3

16 years ago
Yes, I will review these changes soon. At a glance I don't see anything risky
(not likely to break other platforms) with the possible exception of the
libldap/open.c change (I will have to look at that more closely).

As for the review process, the Mozilla client builds currently do not pick up
the LDAP code from the trunk; they pull from ldapcsdk_50_client_branch. If you
just want these changes on the trunk, I can review them. If you want them on the
LDAP branch that is used by the Mozilla client then we need a module owner
approval (from me), one review (which I will do), a superreview, and approval to
commit.
(Reporter)

Comment 4

16 years ago
The open.c changes is inside an existing #ifdef VMS, so its not going to break
anyone else.

The changes need to go into ldapcsdk_50_client_branch, so that Mozilla picks
them up.

Once you're reviewed can you tell me who I should go to for superview and
checkin approval.

Many thanks.
(Reporter)

Updated

16 years ago
Attachment #106353 - Flags: review?(mcs)
(Reporter)

Comment 5

16 years ago
I REALLY need to get these changes in for OpenVMS, and I'd like to do so before
Thanksgiving. Its been 11 days since I posted the patch. If you can't review the
patch at this time, can you suggest someone else who can? I need to move
forward. Thanks, Colin.
(Assignee)

Comment 6

16 years ago
Comment on attachment 106353 [details] [diff] [review]
LDAP changes

Sorry for the delay. r=mcs.
Attachment #106353 - Flags: superreview?
Attachment #106353 - Flags: review?(mcs)
Attachment #106353 - Flags: review+
(Assignee)

Updated

16 years ago
Attachment #106353 - Flags: superreview?
(Reporter)

Comment 7

16 years ago
Thanks Mark. Should I just request the super-review from any of the usual gang,
or is there a preferred super-reviewer for ldap?
(Assignee)

Comment 8

16 years ago
No preferred SR'r... I just posted a request to the newsgroup.
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
(Reporter)

Comment 9

15 years ago
Comment on attachment 106353 [details] [diff] [review]
LDAP changes

Looking for a superreviewer
Attachment #106353 - Flags: superreview?
(Reporter)

Comment 10

15 years ago
This is blocking my work on Mozilla 1.3. Setting severity and milestone fields
according.
Severity: normal → blocker
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla1.3

Comment 11

15 years ago
making a non-specific super-review request probably isn't gonna do much good.
you're much more likely to get a response if you make the request of a specific
super-reviewer.
(Reporter)

Comment 12

15 years ago
Comment on attachment 106353 [details] [diff] [review]
LDAP changes

Brendan, could you sr this please.
Attachment #106353 - Flags: superreview? → superreview?(brendan)
Comment on attachment 106353 [details] [diff] [review]
LDAP changes

rs=brendan@mozilla.org, cc'd seawood in case he has anything to add.

/be
Attachment #106353 - Flags: superreview?(brendan) → superreview+
(Assignee)

Updated

15 years ago
Attachment #106353 - Flags: approval1.3a?

Comment 15

15 years ago
Comment on attachment 106353 [details] [diff] [review]
LDAP changes

a=asa for checkin to 1.3a
Attachment #106353 - Flags: approval1.3a? → approval1.3a+
(Reporter)

Comment 16

15 years ago
Checked in to trunk.
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 15 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED

Comment 17

15 years ago
Spam for bug 129472
QA Contact: nobody → nobody
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.