Re: getaddrinfo() behaviour

2007-10-02 Thread Giacomo A. Catenazzi
Anthony Towns wrote: On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 04:30:17PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: Ian Jackson writes (Re: getaddrinfo() behaviour): Limiting the TC's power to overrule a technical decision to only cases where the TC believes that the wrong behaviour makes the package unsuitable for release

Re: getaddrinfo() behaviour

2007-10-02 Thread Florian Weimer
* Anthony Towns: Updating the proposed standard has not been tried. Just to give you an idea of the time scale involved: moving RFC 3484 to HISTORIC (which is the most likely result, at least for the Rule 9 part) will take at least a year. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a

Re: getaddrinfo() behaviour

2007-10-02 Thread Ian Jackson
Anthony Towns writes (Re: getaddrinfo() behaviour): The only reason suitability for release is relevant is in overriding the directive that we'll not make a technical decision until efforts to resolve it via consensus have been tried and failed. We haven't made efforts to get a consensus

Re: getaddrinfo() behaviour

2007-10-02 Thread Pierre Habouzit
On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 08:37:42AM +, Florian Weimer wrote: * Anthony Towns: Updating the proposed standard has not been tried. Just to give you an idea of the time scale involved: moving RFC 3484 to HISTORIC (which is the most likely result, at least for the Rule 9 part) will take at

Re: getaddrinfo() behaviour

2007-10-02 Thread Anthony Towns
On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 10:37:42AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: * Anthony Towns: Updating the proposed standard has not been tried. Just to give you an idea of the time scale involved: moving RFC 3484 to HISTORIC (which is the most likely result, at least for the Rule 9 part) will take at

Re: getaddrinfo() behaviour

2007-10-01 Thread Ian Jackson
Anthony Towns writes (Re: getaddrinfo() behaviour): In my opinion, if this isn't an RC issue, there's no urgency to having glibc changed prior to the standards changing, and as such, this isn't the last resort so the tech ctte shouldn't be deciding the issue, let alone overruling

Re: getaddrinfo() behaviour

2007-10-01 Thread Ian Jackson
Ian Jackson writes (Re: getaddrinfo() behaviour): Limiting the TC's power to overrule a technical decision to only cases where the TC believes that the wrong behaviour makes the package unsuitable for release would eviscerate the only mechanism we have for dealing with errors by maintainers

Re: getaddrinfo() behaviour

2007-10-01 Thread Anthony Towns
On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 04:30:17PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: Ian Jackson writes (Re: getaddrinfo() behaviour): Limiting the TC's power to overrule a technical decision to only cases where the TC believes that the wrong behaviour makes the package unsuitable for release would eviscerate