On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 7:12 AM, Vignatti Tiago (Nokia-D/Helsinki) <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 03:30:03PM +0200, ext Dan Nicholson wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 6:07 AM, Vignatti Tiago (Nokia-D/Helsinki) >> > >> > I'd say to push the first and second of this set to 1.9, given their >> > importance. This third one concerns more clean up, so I'll work a bit more, >> > squash to my tree and eventually we can push later when the merge window is >> > opened. >> >> I don't see any reason to introduce an ABI break for 1.9. We can still >> get the benefit of not calling the expensive pciaccess functions >> without causing any superfluous rebuilds. > > that's what I meant, isn't? The first two patches don't introduce ABI > breakage.
Yeah, I was agreeing with putting in the first two patches but not the third as is. -- Dan _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
