James Yonan wrote: > Alon Bar-Lev wrote: > > On Tuesday 10 February 2009 13:35:35 David Balazic wrote: > >> Ping ? > >> > >> Should I resend the patch without the end-of-line-spaces change ? > > > > James has his own response times. > > I suggest you have much patience.... :) > > > > Alon. > > I apologize for not having the bandwidth to focus as much on > the patch > queue as I would like, but please understand that we're on > the verge of > releasing 2.1 and we have to be very conservative about accepting > patches at this point. > > I think it's fair to ask that we try to limit ourselves at this late > stage to patches that address issues that affect a large number of > users, or bug fixes that are sufficiently trivial that there > is little > or no chance of causing unforeseen breakage. I think there > needs to be > an argument for why the patch is important right now, as opposed to > waiting a while for the 2.2 beta series.
Of course. - the bug has been reported in several instances (see my first mail) - the patch affects only one architecture (besides the unused parameter on others; I could have made different function declarations for different archs, but that would be less readable/maintainable IMO) - the patch affects only one code path, that is taken only when the bug is triggered - it is simple: - a few lines to record the gateway interface name - a few lines to use it in case the gw addresss is 0.0.0.0 - it is field tested (in a scenario which triggers the bug) Regards, David
