On 17-02-2026 11:17:18 +0800, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote: > On Tue, Feb 17, 2026 at 01:55:39AM +0100, Alejandro Colomar wrote: > > >On 2026-02-17T06:46:05+0800, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote: > >> Since we won't fully get rid of the --without-wc-funcs until (probably) > >> 2.5.0, and since this is more of a type-safe addition than fixing any real > >> overflow issue, I'm inclined to create a new branch, e.g. future/2.5.0, and > >> push this commit there. > >> > >> Once we cut the 2.4.0 release, I'll pull patches out of that branch into > >> master. Does that sounds okay? > > > >I can keep the patches for you; you don't need to pull them now. I'll > >take care of rebasing them if needed, which will reduce the amount of > >work you'll have to do. Just let me know when more or less I should > >resend, and I'll resend. > > > >But of course, feel free to apply to any branch, if that's simpler for > >you. :) > > I can do both! :-) > > Since you have Developer credentials, you can push/rebase future/2.5.0 > too. I'll push the patch up there shortly, and when you, the other > Developers, or I think about it can rebase commit(s) there periodically.
Why not cut the 2.4.0 branch now, then apply the patch to main? To me it seems like for a relatively small project like Mutt, development should never be blocked by release cycles. Fixes can always be (attempted to be) backported to release branches, though. Thanks, Fabian
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
