Re: Vetos in 1.6.x branch -- and how they impact trunk
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 09:48:07AM -0400, Mark Phippard wrote:
> There are some vetos in the 1.6.x branch that seem like they are
> questioning the change, not just whether it was a candidate for
> backport. What does that mean for trunk and 1.7? Here are the items
> I am thinking of (leaving out the items that were vetoed only because
> they were not considered appropriate for a fix release):
> * r878078, r878088, r878102, r878196
> Make KWallet window attached to terminal window.
> Without this change, KWallet window can appear behind terminal window
> and is left after killing terminal.
> +1: arfrever
> -0: peters
> -1: rhuijben ("/proc/%ld/stat" is ugly and Linux-specific -
> would just getenv("WINDOWID") work instead?)
> -1: stsp (I've removed the Linux-specific code from trunk in r1002144
> and r1002151, so trunk code only relies on getenv("WINDOWID").
> I would +1 a backport that also merges these revisions).
The above does not affect trunk since the bad code has been removed.
We never updated the backport nomintation to include the revisions
that removed the bad code from trunk.
Received on 2011-05-17 17:18:12 CEST
This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev