Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

The inactivity timer wasn't working. The on/off events from the time… #559

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

jduda
Copy link
Collaborator

@jduda jduda commented Nov 15, 2015

…rs were getting confused with the on/off events from the Hawkey and security sensors. I changed the logic to handle the events from the timers first, then the motion sensors. Now the inactivity timers work properly.

…s were getting confused with the on/off events from the Hawkey and security sensors. I changed the logic to handle the events from the timers first, then the motion sensors. Now the inactivity timers work properly.
@hollie
Copy link
Owner

hollie commented Nov 17, 2015

Jim, I guess you want this in the next stable we're going to release in the next weeks, or do you want further testing and include this for v4.1?

Regards,
Lieven.

@jduda
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jduda commented Nov 18, 2015

Hi Lieven,

Yes please. I did the push for the next stable. The changes have been working well for me for a few weeks now.

Regards,

Jim

On 11/17/2015 03:14 PM, Lieven Hollevoet wrote:

Jim, I guess you want this in the next stable we're going to release in the next weeks, or do you want further testing and include this for v4.1?

Regards,
Lieven.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub #559 (comment).

@marcmerlin
Copy link
Collaborator

I'm ok with merging, but "This branch has conflicts that must be resolved
Use the command line to resolve conflicts before continuing."
Could you resolve that bit?

@hollie
Copy link
Owner

hollie commented Jan 13, 2016

Hey guys,

I'm very sorry but currently I have zero bandwidth to work on this project. Earliest I could promise something is within 2 weeks...

Kind regards,
Lieven.

@jduda
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jduda commented Jan 14, 2016

I honestly don't know what I have to do to fix it.
Any advice?
I believe my forked branch was equal to the git hub when I did the pull request.

Regards,
Jim

On 01/13/2016 09:57 AM, Marc MERLIN wrote:

I'm ok with merging, but "This branch has conflicts that must be resolved
Use the command line to resolve conflicts before continuing."
Could you resolve that bit?


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub #559 (comment).

@marcmerlin
Copy link
Collaborator

@hollie it looks like everyone sending pull requests has the same problem. Can you see what's going on?
@jduda without knowing more, I'd try to resync against master, re-apply your patch(es) and try again

@hollie
Copy link
Owner

hollie commented Feb 25, 2016

The problem is that there were a few open pull requests at the time we merged the perltidy changes into master.

As the pull requests were created before the perltidy changes there are 2 pull requests changing the same file (the perltify one and this one). As a result git cannot determine what to do with the 2 changes to the same file and tells this by saying there are conflicts.

The solution is indeed to bring the repo up to date with master, fix the conflicts and commit again. This should also update this pull request and make it mergeable.

@hollie
Copy link
Owner

hollie commented Feb 25, 2016

Please see #566 to see on how to fix.

@hollie
Copy link
Owner

hollie commented Mar 20, 2016

Hello @jduda can you please check if #581 has the changes you want to apply? I've ensured the merge conflicts are resolved. I'll close this pull request and if you agree with #581 I will merge it there.

@hollie hollie closed this Mar 20, 2016
hplato added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 10, 2016
Merged proposed change in #559 by @jduda after perltidy change.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants