H Chip, The scope in functional sense is small but not in kloc sense. I am going to have to do the backport anyway, because we (SBP) are going to run with it. It is not going to be a cherry-pick exercise is my experience in the past, so hence the question on the list. I have tested this in master and am running it in a patched 4.1.1. The question is If it is just Schuberg Philis running vpc gateways on SDN and there is no interest in this for the rest of the community, or is there.
Also this is the final of a multistage patch that started out a long time ago. So with a favorable advocate this would be a 'fix' of the 4.2 code. I won't kill anybody over it; it's only a matter of principle, nothing more. I am not looking to change consensus unless we are going for quicker and smaller iterations;) regards, Daan On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 8:15 AM, Chip Childers <chipchild...@apache.org> wrote: > On Sun, Nov 03, 2013 at 08:12:00PM +0100, Daan Hoogland wrote: >> H Abhinandan, >> >> At the moment a patch for pluging vpc private gateways is in >> master/4.3. At Schuberg Philis we have it running as a special in >> 4.1.1 as well. Is it alright to port this to the public branch of >> 4.2.1? otherwise we will (need to) make a private branch (again). >> >> regards, >> Daan > > The general consensus has been that "minor" releases are bug-fix only. > Would you consider this that? Or is the scope of the patch itself small > enough (and low risk enough) that we should do it anyway? Or... do we > change our previous consensus?
