[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Patch for 3.4.x (bug #32747)

From: Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso
Subject: Re: Patch for 3.4.x (bug #32747)
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 07:29:35 -0600

2011/3/15 John W. Eaton <address@hidden>:
> On 15-Mar-2011, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
> | Attached is a patch for #32747. I patched on the stable branch,
> | because that's where it should go. We really ought to merge stable
> | onto default. I tried to do it myself, but the two branches have
> | diverged considerably and I wasn't able to decide myself on how
> | all the merges should go. Particularly painful are the ChangeLogs,
> | since their structure is linear, but our VCS is not.
> I know that you disagree with the way the branches are currently
> managed, but I would appreciate it if you would respect my role as
> the manager of the stable branch and not check in changes there.

Well, that's why I didn't push it, and also partly because I'm not
entirely sure that this is the right patch, perhaps doesn't cover all
corner cases. "Be bold," as they say in Wikipedia... but not too bold.

At any rate, I thought you could decide if the patch should be applied
to stable and later you could duplicate it on default if you prefer. I
am fairly certain a segfault shouldn't be in a stable branch, so
submitting a patch against stable at least would not incur the problem
of later having to remember to transplant it from default onto stable.
Forgetting to transplant it from stable onto default seemed like the
lesser problem, and I opted for that.

- Jordi G. H.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]