Hi, I'm also strongly against backporting features because it also gives less interest for people to switch to the next version... Furthermore, it does not make much sense to backport features since we also aim releasing haproxy community more often than what we used to do.
Baptiste Le 21 janv. 2016 20:27, "Pradeep Jindal" <praddyjin...@gmail.com> a écrit : > Understood, it can wait for sure. If need be we can apply the patch on our > version and use a custom build. > > Thanks Willy! > On Jan 22, 2016 12:52 AM, "Willy Tarreau" <w...@1wt.eu> wrote: > >> Hi Pradeep, >> >> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 02:51:51PM +0530, Pradeep Jindal wrote: >> > Hi Willy, >> > >> > Haven't we merged the "agent-send" feature in 1.6? If not, is it >> possible >> > to merge it? >> >> I'd rather avoid if not absolutely required. What we've seen in the past >> is that people pick configs found on blogs and try to use them with their >> distros then don't understand why some directives are not supported, just >> because the distro runs on a specific version and backports fixes only. >> That's in part why we stopped backporting features to stable versions with >> 1.5. The other reason is that we broke 1.4 multiple times by backporting >> small things that we couldn't revert later because of users using them, >> and had great difficulties fixing (eg: send-name-header). >> >> Do you *really* need it in 1.6 now or can this wait for 1.7 in 7-8 months >> ? >> >> Note I'm not strongly opposed, I'm just being very careful to avoid later >> regrets as I've been used to this a lot over the years. >> >> Just let me know (and others as well, it's possible that some people are >> definitely opposed to a backport and I'll respect that since it's the >> default policy, just like some other people might want it). >> >> I recommend, users decide and I obey, you see. >> >> Willy >> >>
