From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Michael Tremer <michael.tremer@ipfire.org>
To: development@lists.ipfire.org
Subject: Re: rsync 3.2.2
Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2020 11:01:48 +0100
Message-ID: <01E50C03-FAD9-47DA-AE85-F4B7D4DD7175@ipfire.org>
In-Reply-To: <83e7f1ec-fb6a-a3ad-370a-e8a399652714@ipfire.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7169282445234833968=="
List-Id: <development.lists.ipfire.org>

--===============7169282445234833968==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi,

> On 5 Jul 2020, at 17:51, Matthias Fischer <matthias.fischer(a)ipfire.org> w=
rote:
>=20
> Hi,
>=20
> now it happened - rsync 3.2.2 is out and running. Earlier then I expected...

Well, this happens.

> Before I do this, I'd rather ask:
>=20
> Shall I mark the existing patch for 'rsync 3.2.1' as "superseded" and
> send a new patch or shall I just send an update for the existing 3.2.1
> patch? I want to leave 'zstd 1.4.5' and 'popt 1.18' as they are.

However, I would not say that it makes sense to update to this release unless=
 there are some critical fixes in it. If there are aesthetic or other minor f=
ixes in this release, I am sure we can skip one so that we keep enough space =
in the updates for the bigger stuff (Python, perl, etc.).

I am very happy with your effort, but we basically make every third patch fro=
m you land in a release now. That sounds like a lot of work that can be inves=
ted into all the other packages that we have maybe?

-Michael

>=20
> Opinions?
>=20
> Best,
> Matthias


--===============7169282445234833968==--