Nicolas Baradakis <nbk@sitadelle.com> wrote:
I'd prefer 1.1.0 rather than 1.0.6, even if I don't like branches of branches in CVS.
Yeah, I agree.
There many, many changes in CVS that may go in 1.1.0. I can't tell all of them, but it includes: newer autotools, {Pre,Post}-Proxy-Type stanzas, support of ${Cisco-AVPair[n]} syntax, -n and -p options in radclient, changes in rlm_attr_filter, new rlm_sql_log & radsqlrelay...
I'm OK with putting in things that are easy. If it's hard, let's punt. So newer autotools make me nervous, but much of the rest of what you said sounds OK.
It'd be nice to have all of that in 1.1.0, but it'd mean to back-port a lot of things. I'm starting to think perhaps it's easier to branch CVS head and to downgrade a few files to undo IPv6 work (less than 10 files?) and some other things we keep for 2.0.
That scares me even more than back-porting things. I think much of the back-porting can be done easily, or simplified by using monotone. I'll create the branch off of release_1_0, and start committing code. Alan DeKok.