On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 5:03 AM, Evan Huus <[email protected]> wrote: > There is currently a change pending backport to the 1.12 branch (long > since committed to master) that is a non-trivial dissector upgrade. > Normally we don't backport this kind of change, to keep the regression > potential to a minimum for stable releases, but this situation is > somewhat unusual. The protocol in question was still being actively > designed and developed when the 1.12 branch was created, so the > dissector currently in the 1.12 branch implements a basically > abandoned version of the spec that never ended up in serious use. > > I am ambivalent on this right now. I don't want to cause too much > churn on the stable branch, but I can see the argument for backporting > it regardless. It's also worth noting that while the protocol in > question now is relatively narrowly focused, we will likely run into > the exact same issue soon with HTTP2 which is rather more significant. > > What does everyone think? Should we be conservative and forbid this > sort of thing? Permit it, but only after some extra level of > testing/review? Other options? > > Thanks, > Evan > > (The change in question is https://code.wireshark.org/review/4050 but > I'm kind of looking for a more general resolution given that we're > going to run into this problem again.)
My opinion : When it is some "minor change" and don't need add/change a lot of code (< 250 lines ?), it will be ok Avoid to add/change some new header field (hf) in case of HTTP2, i waiting the final draft to backport fix (to be sure there is no new frame change...) When final draft will be available, will be no longer need a support of old draft (all implementation follow quicky the change on HTTP2 spec) About https://code.wireshark.org/review/4050 tfs change will be remove (it is a enhance for me), and also don't remove the if 0 (only add stuff for support last change) > ___________________________________________________________________________ > Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]> > Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev > Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev > mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe ___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe
