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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox