>>>>> On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 15:32:12 -0400, Robert Story (Coders) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
>>>>> said:

DS> OK, Robert - I think you've got the necessary backing to apply
DS> this particular patch.  (Unless Wes wants to wield a veto....)

Robert> Yes, I was actually holding on for his comment, since there is
Robert> an outstanding objection.

Well, you're at like 3-1 at the moment.  And I have bad news for you:
you're now 3-2.  I agree with Dave.  This is a bug that needs fixing.
It should be applied immediately to the 5.1 tree, but it is not a bug
that will be hit by a huge number of people and for those that do,
they can always either apply the patch (put it in official patches for
5.2!) or downgrade to something else or wait for 5.2.1 (which should
be soon in an ideal world).  Impact on most people: low, complexity:
not as low thus I don't call it a show-stopper.

What Dave said earlier is absolutely true:  We're being shy because
we've made mistakes at the last minute that have caused an immediate
need for a new release.  And let me tell you: it sucks when you do that.

-- 
Wes Hardaker
Sparta


-------------------------------------------------------
This Newsletter Sponsored by: Macrovision 
For reliable Linux application installations, use the industry's leading
setup authoring tool, InstallShield X. Learn more and evaluate 
today. http://clk.atdmt.com/MSI/go/ins0030000001msi/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-coders mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders

Reply via email to