Re: Backport policy, WAS: Re: svn commit: r678140 - /apr/apr/branches/1.3.x/memory/unix/apr_pools.c

[William A. Rowe, Jr.]

Mladen Turk wrote:

Sander Striker wrote:

Modified:
   apr/apr/branches/1.3.x/memory/unix/apr_pools.c

This is just an example, I'm seeing a change land on trunk and a
minute later on 1.3.x.  What's our backport policy?  Do we just commit
to trunk and 1.3.x, or are we going to go a route where we get review
prior to backporting?  Think httpd STATUS...

I usually wait for a day or two before committing to 1.3.x or 1.2.x
from trunk. This particular one is copy/paste typo and was not observed
until Bojan and myself did some actual hard core testing.

Think the backporting policy is "act responsible" right now,
or am I wrong here?

APR entirely operates under CtR.

Fortunately, the pace of development has ensured that these can be reviewed,
and our versioning policy avoids debates as in httpd about what "features"
can be backported.  Since all new features are to trunk only, it's a fairly
clean policy.


I don't see any reason to move to RtC, but discussion is always welcome.