It actually makes a lot of sense.
Please ignore my other comment on master about having the IPv6 RA patch on
2.9,
doing it this way, we effectively have it already.
On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 5:51 PM Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 03:58:08PM +, Stokes, Ian wrote:
> > > Hello everyo
On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 03:58:08PM +, Stokes, Ian wrote:
> > Hello everyone. We are at the point in the release cycle where
> > traditionally we would fork a branch from master for release. We have
> > tried a slightly different approach a few times and I'd like to propose
> > that we do it a
> Hello everyone. We are at the point in the release cycle where
> traditionally we would fork a branch from master for release. We have
> tried a slightly different approach a few times and I'd like to propose
> that we do it again. Instead of forking immediately, I propose that we
> "freeze" m
Hello everyone. We are at the point in the release cycle where
traditionally we would fork a branch from master for release. We have
tried a slightly different approach a few times and I'd like to propose
that we do it again. Instead of forking immediately, I propose that we
"freeze" master so t