22 Apr
2005
22 Apr
'05
12:22 p.m.
Hello,
I think Juha has a point. Those changes are not backwards compatible, it's
more than just a bug fix. Even I am not sure that everything works as
expected because I did not test it properly. I was hoping that backporting
them would not introduce any troubles, but this does not seem to be true.
Bogdan, please revert the changes and we will stick to the original
version. I think we should not be doing backwards incopatible changes
within that release.
It would be also unfair to others (Jamey) who were denied to do changes
in 0.9.0 branch because it was frozen.
Jan.
On 22-04 13:15, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Juha,
indeed rel_0_9_0 is and will stay frozen if we ever what to have a
release. Rules state clear that once frozen, no commits are allowed
excepting fixes.
What you miss here - or I haven't made it clear enough - is that the
auth* commit doesn't backport any new features, improvements, etc, but
backports a *cleanup* of these modules, cleanup which fixes a lot of
inconsistencies - which in my opinion goes into fixing area.
If this cause you any inconveniences, I'm really sorry, but our major
concern now must be to get a new SER release as best as possible.
bogdan
Juha Heinanen wrote:
Martin Koenig writes:
_______________________________________________
Serdev mailing list
serdev(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serdev I, from a user's point of view, am against
the reversal of this
backport. I like the functionality in 0_9_0 alot and think it is very
useful. However, Juha's point regarding performance remains valid.
there are lots of things i like in unstable branch and which i would
like to get officially committed to rel_0_9_0, but haven't proposed or
done any, because i thought that as advertized, rel_0_9_0 is a frozen
branch, where only bug fixes were allowed to be committed.
if the rules have changed, perhaps i'm allowed to commit lcr module, for
example, to rel_0_9_0? either we re-open the branch or we don't.
the auth rpid changes that were committed yesterday, will force me to
change in MANY rel_0_9_0 proxies the way radius returns caller rpid,
i.e., the chance is not backwards compatible.
is there anyone in charge here?
-- juha