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

Re: Call for Votes (getaddrinfo)



* Ian Jackson (ian@davenant.greenend.org.uk) [071129 20:52]:
>  -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>  [1] Choice X: Do not use rule 9, overrule maintainer, etc., as above.
>  [4] Choice S: Sort IPv4 addrs according to rule 9 in getaddrinfo
>  [3] Choice M: Leave the choice up to the maintainers.
>  [2] Choice F: Further discussion
>  -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Rationale is mostly known already - Rule 9 doesn't make sense in the
IPv4 world (as we have discussed) and breaks current behaviour (for more
detailed analysis, see e.g. Ians mail I'm responding to).

I'm not argueing about backporting to stable or not right now, as I'm
biased a bit on that :) and would like to see this question be handled
in the usual SRM accept process.

However, using the usual rules, chances are pretty good to get that done
once the fix has reached testing.


Cheers,
Andi
-- 
  http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/



Reply to: