On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 10:23:50AM +0200, Lukáš Doktor wrote: > Hello Guannan, > > theoretically we should not accept such backport, because it's a > new feature, not a bugfix. Anyway it touches `avocado.utils` and > it's not changing existing callbacks. What do you think, guys? In > my view the `avocado/core` is the core and I wouldn't like such > changes there, but I'd be fine with some exceptions when it goes > to `avocado/utils`.
I think 36lts should not be touched, unless you're doing a critical bugfix, which is not the case here. It's not just about a simple backport, it's about expectations and maintenance of a LTS release. Think of new versions, release notes, "interrupting" conservative users, testing, potential for regressions, etc. This would create a bad precedent. Just my 2 cents. Thanks. - Ademar > Dne 8.9.2017 v 08:41 Guannan Sun napsal(a): > > Hi, > > > > As RHEL6 still need use 36lts, and cases updated with using the function in > > PR 1376: > > > > https://github.com/avocado-framework/avocado/pull/1376 > > > > could you help backport the commits to 36lts? > > > > Thanks! > > Guannan > > > > -- Ademar Reis Red Hat ^[:wq!
