From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] iptables: accept multiple IP address specifications for -s, -d Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 16:31:23 +0200 Message-ID: <4A608B3B.20702@trash.net> References: <1244229955-27642-1-git-send-email-jengelh@medozas.de> <1244229955-27642-2-git-send-email-jengelh@medozas.de> <4A2A1260.7050207@netfilter.org> <4A2D171E.9060401@trash.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Pablo Neira Ayuso , Netfilter Developer Mailing List To: Jan Engelhardt Return-path: Received: from stinky.trash.net ([213.144.137.162]:60905 "EHLO stinky.trash.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933405AbZGQObe (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Jul 2009 10:31:34 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Jan Engelhardt wrote: > On Thursday 2009-06-25 19:08, Jan Engelhardt wrote: >> On 2009-06-10 12:19:59, Patrick wrote: >>> On Wednesday 2009-06-10 14:16, Jan Engelhardt wrote: >>>> Git is not as castrated as Hg when it comes to branches, so why not >>>> make a "stable" branch that is then regularly merged into master? :) >>> I don't see why that would currently be necessary. We're talking >>> about a few days, and in fact I'd rather have people test the >>> current code before the release instead of hacking on new things :) >> Yeah but in general? The - judging from their version numbers - >> x.y.z.S stable versions like 1.4.3.1 used to receive lots of new >> features because there is just master, in which case it should >> have been the new 1.4.4 already. >> So either z is bumped more often and S-versions will not >> be released, or S only receives fixes, necessiting a separate branch. >> Objections? > > It would be cool to get an answer here so I know how to twingle > patchbranches that I'd like to submit. Well, I don't object to having a stable branch when we actually do need to release pure bug-fix versions. But I'd say those can be created on demand.