Re: release update: freeze, RC Bug count, python, toolchain
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 11:45:46PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> Full IPv6 support
> There has been some confusion about the Etch release goal about IPv6. Our
> understanding of that release goal is that all network applications should be
> able to work with both IPv4 and IPv6. Also stateful packet filtering should
> work for both protocols. Please consider all bugs tagged "ipv6" to be
> upgraded to at least important - or even better, fix them.
How invasive ways are welcome/allowed?
For example, I use pound (a reverse proxy/URL redirector/SSL wrapper).
* unstable has 2.0
* I use 2.0.9 with my partial (listen-only) IPv6
* upstream just released 2.1
The maintainer seems to be MIA. I didn't unload my patches (IPv6, WebDAV)
into the BTS yet as upstream kept saying they'll release "tomorrow" or "in
three days from now" for a few months. The new stable upstream release got
released on Saturday, but I've been sick so I didn't port my IPv6 patch to
2.1 yet; it should be done and tested soon, though.
So, should I:
a) make a backport to 2.0; or
b) provide patches for the current upstream (2.1) only; or
c) do a complete overhaul, including unrelated issues; giving the maintainer
a tarball and svn
(Of course, asking the maintainer again is the first thing to do)
1KB // Microsoft corollary to Hanlon's razor:
// Never attribute to stupidity what can be
// adequately explained by malice.