On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 08:16:56AM +0100, Michal Sekletar wrote:
Also it would be nice if we agree on single place where development
happens and stick to that.
Because bpf.tcpdump.org has a bad track-record (IIRC multiple power,
network failures in the past) I am for sticking with GitHub.
Guy Harris g...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
(I'm fine with making it the Official Home if Michael chooses to do so.
I've managed to cope with the workflow changes required when
libpcap/tcpdump switched to Git, when Wireshark switched to Git, and
when Wireshark switched to Git+Gerrit,
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 09:22:23AM -0500, Michael Richardson wrote:
Guy Harris g...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
(I'm fine with making it the Official Home if Michael chooses to do so.
I've managed to cope with the workflow changes required when
libpcap/tcpdump switched to Git, when
Michal Sekletar msekl...@redhat.com wrote:
Guy Harris g...@alum.mit.edu wrote: (I'm fine with making it the
Official Home if Michael chooses to do so. I've managed to cope
with the workflow changes required when libpcap/tcpdump switched to
Git, when Wireshark switched to
On Nov 24, 2014, at 1:04 AM, Romain Francoise rfranco...@debian.org wrote:
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 11:35:21PM -0800, Guy Harris wrote:
So did I. :-)
(See branches tcpdump_4.1 through tcpdump_4.6.)
Ah, great, I need patches for Debian stable, which ships tcpdump 4.3.0.
I was about to use
On Nov 24, 2014, at 10:25 AM, Michael Richardson m...@sandelman.ca wrote:
Michal Sekletar msekl...@redhat.com wrote:
I don't agree. Rather what are you hearing is a request that code
should appear in master branch on GitHub with reasonable time delay.
So, it happens occasionally that
I don't really want to put *all* my eggs on github.
I agree that GitHub is a business and businesses are not always in a good shape
and are not forever in the best case. Specifically, many projects have had a
lesson from SourceForge developments in the recent few years.
Besides that, where a
On Nov 24, 2014, at 1:24 PM, Denis Ovsienko de...@ovsienko.info wrote:
So the problem is to let GitHub do its good things to tcpdump yet to protect
from the bad ones. To me it seems that for the next few years the best
balance between survivability and convenience would be in continuing to
okay, can we start again.
I would appreciate some clear data and clear complaints.
This is what I heard:
a) which is master, bpf or github?
b) bpf is unreliable.
c) there is some issue (please explain more) with bpf.tcpdump.org
experiencing auto-merging difficulties.
d)
On Nov 24, 2014, at 7:01 PM, Michael Richardson m...@sandelman.ca wrote:
okay, can we start again.
I would appreciate some clear data and clear complaints.
This is what I heard:
a) which is master, bpf or github?
b) bpf is unreliable.
c) there is some issue (please explain
10 matches
Mail list logo
