> Hi, > > On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 11:14:33AM +0200, David Sommerseth wrote: >> On 31/05/17 09:02, Gert Doering wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 02:31:40AM +0200, David Sommerseth wrote: >> >> If we really do care for supporting 0.9.8, in release/2.4 - I can >> give >> >> this an ACK. Otherwise, I think it might be better to backport >> >> 039a89c331e9b7998d804 + 79ea67f77ca3afe91222f. >> > >> > You are the one that objects most violently if we break users' >> expectations >> >> Yes and no. In regards to end users, I am very careful. In regards to >> package maintainers, I am less weary as they won't distribute failing >> builds to end users. This change hits package building, not the end >> user. > > Well, this is a somewhat simplistic world view, with "package builders" > and "package installers". > > People are stuck on older enterprise distributions, for whatever reasons, > but want a newer openvpn version - so they get the source bundle, and > compile. Which is a perfectly fine deployment model - and we should not > break things in 2.4.3 that worked just fine in 2.4.2 for them (unless > there is a strong reason, like "we have a vulnerability here that we > cannot fix unless we abandon an older API").
I strongly support your view, Gert. I really hope we do not see such breakage in minor stable releases. Regards, Simon ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Openvpn-devel mailing list Openvpn-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openvpn-devel
