Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 14:13:44 -0500 From: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> To: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org>, Alfred Perlstein <alfred@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/contrib/cvs/src server.c Message-ID: <p06020496bc3b163cb851@[128.113.24.47]> In-Reply-To: <20040126125638.GC9772@madman.celabo.org> References: <200401260008.i0Q08cIl014780@repoman.freebsd.org> <20040126000922.GA6102@madman.celabo.org> <20040126004123.GJ53344@elvis.mu.org> <20040126125638.GC9772@madman.celabo.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 6:56 AM -0600 1/26/04, Jacques A. Vidrine wrote: > >Seriously, if we were talking about 4.x I might have more >sympathy, but I believe this is an appropriate behavior to >change in a 5.x release. > >Apparently the CVS developers also felt this was an appropriate >change for minor point release. > >Finally, there was overwhelming support for this change: over >the past month I've received several requests for it; and RE >received several requests to incorporate the change in 5.2.1. I have no objection to the change, but it does seem to me that *any* change to a "security" branch deserves to be mentioned in UPDATING. I do not agree that we should ignore that policy simply because this is a "5.x-release" branch. [aside: actually, I think it would be more appropriate to call these something like "safe" branches, but that's a bikeshed of a different color...] -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@gilead.netel.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p06020496bc3b163cb851>