From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 24 21:03:34 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC5C616A4E1; Thu, 24 Aug 2006 21:03:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from guido@gvr.org) Received: from gvr.gvr.org (gvr-gw.gvr.org [80.126.103.228]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2039C43D4C; Thu, 24 Aug 2006 21:03:34 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from guido@gvr.org) Received: by gvr.gvr.org (Postfix, from userid 657) id 570C2C181; Thu, 24 Aug 2006 23:03:33 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 23:03:33 +0200 From: Guido van Rooij To: John Baldwin Message-ID: <20060824210333.GB59856@gvr.gvr.org> References: <200608240737.k7O7bDMC085424@repoman.freebsd.org> <20060824101606.414e8bf6@kan.dnsalias.net> <44EDCDD4.6070709@samsco.org> <200608241522.43325.jhb@freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200608241522.43325.jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: cvs-src@freebsd.org, Scott Long , src-committers@freebsd.org, Alexander Kabaev , cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/contrib/ipfilter HISTORY Makefile bpf_filter.c ip_fil.c ipf.h ipmon.h ipt.h kmem.h mlfk_rule.c opts.h radix.c radix_ipf.h snoop.h src/contrib/ipfilter/BSD Makefile Makefile.ipsend kupgrade src/contrib/ipfilter/iplang iplang_l.l ... X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 21:03:34 -0000 On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 03:22:42PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: > > >>>> Log: > > >>>> MFC: ipfilter 4.1.13 > > >>> > > >>>This begs for a question: if ipfilter can not be updated without > > >>>breaking the tree anymore, does it belong there in the first place? > > >> > > >>We could of course also get rid of the tree ;) > > >> > > >>-Guido > > > > > > Tree without ipfilter or ipfilter without tree - this is a > > > technicality. > > > > > > Seriously though, I wonder how ipfilter is being tested before being > > > checked in? Past two commits by you suggested that no testing was done > > > at all. > > > > > > > Missing an added file when doing a check-in is a forgivable mistake, > > especially since Guido isn't the author and likely doesn't have as deep > > of an understanding of the changes as the author does. And, I do highly > > appreciate that Guido is responding quickly to the problems. The > > process with ipfilter still isn't perfect, but it's definitely an > > improvement over the past. > > Yes, this is the first import Guido has done, and I think it has gone well > relatively speaking. Overall I think ipfilter imports will become less > eventful in the future than they have been in the past. Thanks (also to Scott). It wasn't my first though :-( To all others: it was just a stupid mistake and I already apologized. -Guido