I've added an issue for backporting HHH-6855. I thought it was a good idea to include
HHH-6854 so that the backport for HHH-6855 would be tested.
Let me know what you decide about HHH-4358.
Thanks,
Gail
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Ebersole" <steve(a)hibernate.org>
To: "Gail Badner" <gbadner(a)redhat.com>
Cc: "Hibernate" <hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 6:09:47 PM
Subject: Re: [hibernate-dev] Backports for 3.6.10
Actually it is not fixed yet :) Let me think about it.
On Thu 19 Jan 2012 08:08:56 PM CST, Steve Ebersole wrote:
> I think HHH-6855 should be. HHH-6854 is just a test fix, I'd say
> its
> not important for backport.
>
> I don't think there is actually any code changes for HHH-4358. I
> may
> have left that fix version there by mistake.
>
> On Thu 19 Jan 2012 04:05:46 PM CST, Gail Badner wrote:
>> I've created new issues for backporting fixes for 3.6.10.
>>
>> Please take a look at:
>>
https://hibernate.onjira.com/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&mo...
>>
>>
>> I'm not planning to backport dialect-related issues, although I
>> could
>> be talked into it.
>>
>> Steve, should HHH-6855/HHH-6854 and/or HHH-4358 also be
>> backported?
>>
>> Adam, are there any Envers issues that should be backported for
>> 3.6.10? If so, please create new issues for them and assign as
>> appropriate.
>>
>> Feedback?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Gail
>> _______________________________________________
>> hibernate-dev mailing list
>> hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
>
--
steve(a)hibernate.org
http://hibernate.org