Received: by 10.14.216.7 with SMTP id f7mr13495288eep.4.1352490414915;
        Fri, 09 Nov 2012 11:46:54 -0800 (PST)
X-BeenThere: scala-internals@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.14.221.73 with SMTP id q49ls3107859eep.7.gmail; Fri, 09 Nov
 2012 11:46:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.14.216.197 with SMTP id g45mr13517708eep.3.1352490413835;
        Fri, 09 Nov 2012 11:46:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.14.216.197 with SMTP id g45mr13517706eep.3.1352490413818;
        Fri, 09 Nov 2012 11:46:53 -0800 (PST)
Return-Path: <joshua.suer...@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-ee0-f52.google.com (mail-ee0-f52.google.com [74.125.83.52])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id u8si6395460een.1.2012.11.09.11.46.53
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Fri, 09 Nov 2012 11:46:53 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of joshua.suer...@gmail.com designates 74.125.83.52 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.83.52;
Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of joshua.suer...@gmail.com designates 74.125.83.52 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=joshua.suer...@gmail.com; dkim=pass header...@gmail.com
Received: by mail-ee0-f52.google.com with SMTP id b57so3259868eek.39
        for <scala-internals@googlegroups.com>; Fri, 09 Nov 2012 11:46:53 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        bh=Kke9ZdJQJuva1eImNZJXlgT7GTpL/1LrdFtAHtw2wpg=;
        b=NB/czFbCis4GnNSrVeUf4NJHUkIyPFsppTMp0ILpELDz9/Xk8hW6+O1WdKmZOu+Z3z
         y5yKuKWv3ySd0ZddLu3ohvISp+o9Ch3Jwd2sYLi3B+yYkV0Wn5Yut7yrumVizARQS3G8
         bpxANenvSJGXrBhht3Vhuj/Y1NKucFsMlhYKZoth+Y/OEOzHkCvhVREeg1K79+m3o18a
         HSH90q/2//0RW+9bLO5nAMcpYKmOhoaL+1IaFvnM6miKlkqXHm0VhE+CMV+wDExn+1l7
         rp1y0AbiFazpY1zPEsOc00YqLyBjEZ81NCIO/R3lUJyg6C2ZkxGbgmZ7whNr3WZeXdFf
         1KQw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.14.203.69 with SMTP id e45mr40157477eeo.38.1352490413692; Fri,
 09 Nov 2012 11:46:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.223.134.4 with HTTP; Fri, 9 Nov 2012 11:46:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.223.134.4 with HTTP; Fri, 9 Nov 2012 11:46:53 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <b0934db0-5cb4-4a39-b235-eed86644ebbb@googlegroups.com>
References: <421f0dac-248f-48f8-a23d-c3662129d12b@googlegroups.com>
	<CAFLqJkyZpJwH2KzCyqK1gZt4qSuxSm40E0-fgYKp8=bizmy...@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHyB3VWXyscVAgagOZ3p5rMJoM3GhQL7tAhaQo-NkA+V6Hc...@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAFLqJky5V4jGaxdKm4zggWgSGJRCN04s4_MNubLqOL8trTQ...@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHyB3VXRFvJJnhZzfkC0tmWr9njKCT3B7gkTPUJDNpsmGaa...@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAFLqJky+8PdCt9e5oyZrz3SL8WY0ukOd4WkL9=-BiG6eCdb...@mail.gmail.com>
	<b0934db0-5cb4-4a39-b235-eed86644ebbb@googlegroups.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 14:46:53 -0500
Message-ID: <CAFLqJkzsOg=X3-ykDfrP8YyQLbFN5GPmGhxV8wBZ2re_zdY...@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [scala-internals] ListBuffer failure with insert, insertAll,
 update and updated; data corruption with insert, remove
From: Josh Suereth <joshua.suer...@gmail.com>
To: scala-internals@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b344100ab960404ce1536ea

--047d7b344100ab960404ce1536ea
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Yes.  Any issue marked critical shows in release notes.   Blockers, by
nature of "blocking" must be fixed.  Critical are ones you should be aware
of.
AND EVERY RC is a potential release.

That's why we avoid changing much in 2.10.0 because it should be good
enough to release now.
On Nov 9, 2012 10:30 AM, "Simon Ochsenreither" <
simon.ochsenreit...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Was it intended that two of those bugs ended up in the RC2 announcement?
>
> Btw, if we are in the state where RC's could probably ship as final, we
> should write that down more explicitly. (Along the lines of =93if we find=
 no
> additional blocker, RCx will become the final release=94.) This makes peo=
ple
> test their code which would normally not participate in earlier testing
> phases.
>

--047d7b344100ab960404ce1536ea
Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<p dir=3D"ltr">Yes.=A0 Any issue marked critical shows in release notes.=A0=
=A0 Blockers, by nature of &quot;blocking&quot; must be fixed.=A0 Critical =
are ones you should be aware of.<br>
AND EVERY RC is a potential release.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">That&#39;s why we avoid changing much in 2.10.0 because it s=
hould be good enough to release now.</p>
<div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Nov 9, 2012 10:30 AM, &quot;Simon Ochsenreith=
er&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:simon.ochsenreit...@gmail.com">simon.ochsenr=
eit...@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br type=3D"attribution"><blockquote class=
=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padd=
ing-left:1ex">
Was it intended that two of those bugs ended up in the RC2 announcement?<br=
><br>Btw, if we are in the state where RC&#39;s could probably ship as fina=
l, we should write that down more explicitly. (Along the lines of =93if we =
find no additional blocker, RCx will become the final release=94.) This mak=
es people test their code which would normally not participate in earlier t=
esting phases.<br>
</blockquote></div>

--047d7b344100ab960404ce1536ea--