From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>
To: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@medozas.de>
Cc: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>,
Netfilter Developer Mailing List
<netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: iptables branch management
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2011 14:52:56 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E68BAA8.5010501@trash.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LNX.2.01.1109081243320.11934@frira.zrqbmnf.qr>
Am 08.09.2011 13:59, schrieb Jan Engelhardt:
> On Thursday 2011-09-08 12:05, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>
>> Am 05.09.2011 19:54, schrieb Pablo Neira Ayuso:
>>> Hi Jan,
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 04:20:13PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>>>> Hei
>>>>
>>>> I would like to propose a "stable" branch that would be rooted
>>>> in the most recent tag and only receive fixes. Furtheremore,
>>>> the branch is merged time and again into master, so that the
>>>> fix is available in both without cherry-pick. 1.4.12.x releases be made
>>>> from stable, and 1.4.y from master.
>>>> How about it?
>>>
>>> Hm, I remember that we had this discussion before.
>>>
>>> I think it's probably too much overhead for it, looking at how other
>>> similar net-tools are maintained, the amount of contributions that
>>> er receive and amount of changes that get into every version.
>>
>> I also think this is probably overkill, what's wrong with simply
>> creating stable branches on demand if there are important fixes
>> that require a new release?
>
> Nothing wrong, it just has not been done consistently or at all in the
> past. I believe it does not hurt to go ahead with this, also since I am
> statistically taking care of most submissions these days anyway.
What has been done in the past doesn't really matter, we can of course
agree to have a stable branch when needed. But I don't see the point of
having a stable branch as long as it doesn't contain any fixes.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-09-08 12:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-09-02 14:20 iptables branch management Jan Engelhardt
2011-09-02 21:27 ` Maciej Żenczykowski
2011-09-05 17:54 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2011-09-08 10:05 ` Patrick McHardy
2011-09-08 11:59 ` Jan Engelhardt
2011-09-08 12:52 ` Patrick McHardy [this message]
2011-09-08 14:41 ` Jan Engelhardt
2011-09-08 14:58 ` Patrick McHardy
2011-09-09 9:31 ` Peter Volkov
2011-09-09 11:07 ` Jan Engelhardt
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=4E68BAA8.5010501@trash.net \
--to=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=jengelh@medozas.de \
--cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pablo@netfilter.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).