Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 02:15:02 +0100
From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: self-test duration vs. GPU benchmarks

On 10 Dec, 2012, at 1:09 , Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 09, 2012 at 04:27:26AM +0100, magnum wrote:
>> The bottom line is I would like to merge all your patches to bleeding, but I just can't do that and still maintain a tree without them. After the jumbo-6-fixes experience I am absolutely sure it will end up a mess. We need to have *one* tree for people like Dhiru or Claudio to commit to. If that is bleeding, someone need to backport patches. If it's unstable, someone need to forward-port them. I do not wish to do either, I want to write formats.
> 
> I am fine with you actively working on just one tree, and it can be the
> one that we'll release after 1.8.  In that case, though, we should
> expect that 1.7.9-J8, if released, will _not_ include much of the new
> stuff.  So e.g. some of Dhiru's edits to the wiki promising certain
> things in -J8 specifically may be wrong and will need to be adjusted (no
> problem, we can do that).

This will be much like the -fixes branch we had though, which was a mess. On the other hand, it will be easier now because we'll not have a third branch. And with a little more disciplin than I could produce last time it might be a lot better.

OK, so to be realistic we might be best off keeping it the way it is for one more month. Then we declare unstable-jumbo a strictly bugfix-only branch in January and at that point I'll start merging patches and we'll get to adapt ~200 formats to the new interface B-)

Dhiru, others, what do you say about all this?

magnum

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Your e-mail address:

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux - Powered by OpenVZ