From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: RFD: should we do another 2.3-rc for t9001-noxmailer? I'd say not Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2015 14:48:00 -0800 Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Feb 01 23:48:11 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YI3JK-000531-Ds for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2015 23:48:10 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753726AbbBAWsF (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Feb 2015 17:48:05 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp1.int.icgroup.com ([208.72.237.35]:65470 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753456AbbBAWsC (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Feb 2015 17:48:02 -0500 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09764337B0; Sun, 1 Feb 2015 17:48:02 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to :subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=sasl; bh=j +ghqMPC9JjgKYa22v+yMz6R/c4=; b=QsVi0KQYJ6jU/BjMwItGWUcwPUxaYUYwH arMYr41bhyEi24vcsecjr9afwVzo3XXA98gFmBLv2JWphTM6TE08mmijAsYTx4MB d80VirTCZbkn6Du8GUO1k7BYm+QwCihuUAuRArUEqY213OZhoPhy2/Pe7IjaUh5s hDTgBcgAJM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:subject :date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=UIY XuDHhRgwEYaDIWLFltQqlmPhReKPDwXw13oiTiXV7IP3eE1KNEQrHSl1fE4UR7iq eueL7tfHvERMUP8jIla/HCCH0UlLvfyGTe3U2MoGdAeb+Xm6LMkjNKuGNvoM6xmD bFpTPpeqWk9XMS5thvbTO6k6td0BIe/yQtZfongk= Received: from pb-smtp1.int.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1C0A337AF; Sun, 1 Feb 2015 17:48:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [72.14.226.9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 784DF337AD; Sun, 1 Feb 2015 17:48:01 -0500 (EST) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 602DA0C8-AA64-11E4-8344-7BA29F42C9D4-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: I was reviewing the recent bugs and fixes for the last time, and was wondering if we want to do 2.3-rc3 with build fix for those with ancient cURL (tc/curl-vernum-output-broken-in-7.11) and workaround for those with Perl with older Getopt::Long (tc/t9001-noxmailer). - The former is not a regression between 2.2 and 2.3 (i.e. 2.2 already had the same use of curl-config output). - The latter, strictly speaking, is a regression in that tests used to pass but tests in 2.3 no longer pass for those with older Getopt::Long. But the latter is about a test script that lacks work-around, and more importantly, everybody has lived with unconditional X-mailer: output, and the minority with ancient Getopt::Long will survive without being to able to give the new --no-xmailer (or --noxmailer) option just fine. So currently I am leaning to keep these two fixes where they are and tag 2.3 final without them in a few days.