On Thursday 24 August 2006 12:03, Scott Long wrote: > Alexander Kabaev wrote: > > > On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 15:36:28 +0200 > > Guido van Rooij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >>On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 09:20:02AM -0400, Alexander Kabaev wrote: > >> > >>>On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 07:37:12 +0000 (UTC) > >>>Guido van Rooij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>>guido 2006-08-24 07:37:12 UTC > >>>> > >> > >>[..] > >> > >> > >>>> Log: > >>>> MFC: ipfilter 4.1.13 > >>> > >>>This begs for a question: if ipfilter can not be updated without > >>>breaking the tree anymore, does it belong there in the first place? > >> > >>We could of course also get rid of the tree ;) > >> > >>-Guido > > > > Tree without ipfilter or ipfilter without tree - this is a > > technicality. > > > > Seriously though, I wonder how ipfilter is being tested before being > > checked in? Past two commits by you suggested that no testing was done > > at all. > > > > Missing an added file when doing a check-in is a forgivable mistake, > especially since Guido isn't the author and likely doesn't have as deep > of an understanding of the changes as the author does. And, I do highly > appreciate that Guido is responding quickly to the problems. The > process with ipfilter still isn't perfect, but it's definitely an > improvement over the past.
Yes, this is the first import Guido has done, and I think it has gone well relatively speaking. Overall I think ipfilter imports will become less eventful in the future than they have been in the past. -- John Baldwin _______________________________________________ cvs-all@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
