No recent patches were lost. I am talking about patches that I submitted after the 4.2.0 branch. After about two weeks you stopped committing them to both trees, even though I noted that they should be committed to both trees. I thought I remember you telling me at one point that you didn't have a local 4.2.0 tree anymore... I could be wrong, but I got the impression that I shouldn't waste more time with 4.2.0 patches, so that's what I did.
Are you telling me instead that you will be able to apply bug fixes to a stable 4.3.0 tree for the life cycle of that version? That would be nice indeed.
Harold
Alan Hourihane wrote:
On Tue, Jan 14, 2003 at 11:02:37 -0500, Harold L Hunt II wrote:Right, but I am being very pragmatic here. In the past it has been difficult to submit, and get Alan to commit, dual patches for both head and a branch. After about a month, I think Alan deletes the branch, so patches to it seem to go to lala land. So my point is pretty much: January 17 for fewer headaches. :)
All patches you've submitted for head or branch should be there. If they're not then ping me with the patch number. If there's a delay in committing, then it's nothing to do with deleting branches etc. It's to do with my time. Alan.
