From: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>
To: akuster808 <akuster808@gmail.com>
Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bind: Upgrade 9.11.5 -> 9.11.6
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2019 17:55:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190320155530.GA1365@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6251ba28-7d83-e490-c564-7e20cdb8b04f@gmail.com>
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 08:21:31AM -0700, akuster808 wrote:
> On 3/20/19 7:56 AM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 07:35:53AM -0700, akuster808 wrote:
> >>
> >> On 3/20/19 7:09 AM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> >>> Copyright hash changed to to year change.
> >> You are missing one of the more important bits of info that would help
> >> make the decision if this gets into M4 or waits until after 2.7 releases.
> >>
> >> Go look at the 9.11.5-p4 release notes.
> > What part of the release notes are you referring to?
> >
> > And why are you talking about release notes for a version
> > that is neither of the two versions in this upgrade?
>
> Ah, because the 9.11.5 has patch level updates from -p1 to -p5 that are
> not the current 9.11.5 and those changes are included in 9.11.6.
Most items in the 9.11.6 release notes are also in the 9.11.5
release notes.
> Also, nowhere was it mentioned this is a bugfix only update.
It is not a bugfix only update.
> This helps
> me in deciding if this is a back port candidate.
You are saying you were threatening to veto inclusion into 2.7 because
you aren't able to decide whether it should be backported to 2.6?
> Keywords to look for: Bugfix only, CVE's, ABI changes, dependency
> changes, depreciated functions and new features.
>
> I are hoping a little do-diligence in being applied to package updates
> otherwise automation will save us all a bunch of time.
Doing the 9.11.5 -> 9.11.6 upgrade in master is something I wouldn't
have suggested if I wouldn't have considered it reasonable.
Upgrading bind 9.11.4 -> 9.11.6 in thud is a case where
automation or keywords in a commit cannot make the decision.
It doesn't look like a clear case either way to me.
The recipe maintainer might be better qualified to analyse
whether or not this is a backport candidate.
> Thanks,
> Armin
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-20 15:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-20 14:09 [PATCH] bind: Upgrade 9.11.5 -> 9.11.6 Adrian Bunk
2019-03-20 14:35 ` akuster808
2019-03-20 14:56 ` Adrian Bunk
2019-03-20 15:21 ` akuster808
2019-03-20 15:55 ` Adrian Bunk [this message]
2019-03-20 16:33 ` akuster808
2019-03-20 17:05 ` Adrian Bunk
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190320155530.GA1365@localhost \
--to=bunk@stusta.de \
--cc=akuster808@gmail.com \
--cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.