Re: Patching 1.1

From: Andrus Adamchik (andru..bjectstyle.org)
Date: Wed Apr 27 2005 - 11:12:11 EDT

Next message: Cris Daniluk: "prefetch bug"

Previous message: Mike Kienenberger: "Re: Patching 1.1"
In reply to: Mike Kienenberger: "Re: Patching 1.1"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

I agree. Unless we hear more user requests asking us to put it in 1.1, I'd
rather keep it on HEAD only.

Andrus

> Andrus Adamchik <andru..bjectstyle.org> wrote:
>> > Just as a point of information, what's the process for patching
>> older branches?
>> >
>> > Check out the latest 1.1 branch (STABLE-1-1) and commit to that
>> instead?
>> >
>> > -Mike
>>
>> Yes. And of course independently doing the same thing on HEAD.
>
> Is it worthwhile to fix either 308 or 310 in 1.1?
>
> 310 is a "convenience" fix.
> 308 is a pretty rare case, and could have unexpected side-effects.
>
> -Mike

Next message: Cris Daniluk: "prefetch bug"
Previous message: Mike Kienenberger: "Re: Patching 1.1"
In reply to: Mike Kienenberger: "Re: Patching 1.1"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Wed Apr 27 2005 - 11:12:12 EDT