Barry A. Warsaw <ba...@python.org> added the comment: On May 20, 2011, at 10:07 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> >Guido van Rossum <gu...@python.org> added the comment: > >Let me confirm that. Since it is a security patch the entire point of it is >to be placed in the release. Cool, I've ported it over to svn. >I don't want to question the reasons for doing the release from svn instead >of from hg, but I do want to emphasize that the hg branch ought to be >considered the master which svn should track as closely as possible. The >only reason to not port a patch to the svn branch would be if it was >submitted to the hg branch in contradiction with some policy (e.g. a >non-security fix to a branch that should only receive security fixes), and >then it should probably be rolled back in the hg branch (and the decision to >do so should be very visible on python-dev). I'm okay with that. Right now I can't push my reconciled hg repo though because line ending changes were committed to various files in hg but not svn. I don't think they're appropriate frankly, but rolling them back causes hg push to fail. Antoine suggested whitelisting those files in .hgeol, which I'll investigate. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue11442> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com