On 06/10/2023 10:10, David Marchand wrote:
On Wed, Oct 4, 2023 at 7:13 PM Stephen Hemminger
<step...@networkplumber.org> wrote:
On Mon, 2 Oct 2023 10:15:25 +0200
David Marchand <david.march...@redhat.com> wrote:
Bugzilla ID: 1291 ?
This patch (and patch 3) updates some pcapng API, is it worth a RN update?
Fixes: c882eb544842 ("pcapng: fix timestamp wrapping in output files")
Is it worth backporting?
I would say no, as some API update was needed to fix the issue.
But on the other hand, this is an experimental API, so I prefer to ask.
Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <step...@networkplumber.org>
Good question.
Is experimental API allowed to change in a stable release?
I don't think this is cleary described in our ABI policy.
An experimental API may be changed at any time, but nothing is said
wrt backports.
Breaking an API is always a pain, and for a LTS release it would
probably be badly accepted by users.
yes, I agree. IIRC, this arose sometime in the past with a branch that
Luca was maintaining and I think the consensus among LTS maintainers was
not to change experimental API on stable branches.
Cc: Kevin for his opinion.
We may need a clarification on this topic in the doc.
Perhaps it's not a "rule" since experimental API comes with no
guarantee, but I can add something to the docs that it is a guideline
not to break experimental API on stable branch.
