develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from April 2010

CGI.pm 3.49 - Re: [perl.git] branch blead, updated.v5.12.0-49-gcfbab81

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Jesse Vincent
Date:
April 16, 2010 10:12
Subject:
CGI.pm 3.49 - Re: [perl.git] branch blead, updated.v5.12.0-49-gcfbab81
Message ID:
20100416171143.GV5084@fsck.bestpractical.com

On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 05:52:57PM +0200, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
> On 15 April 2010 17:37, Jesse Vincent <jesse@fsck.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 09:35:34AM +0200, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
> >> Author: Rafael Garcia-Suarez <rgs@consttype.org>
> >> Date:   Thu Apr 15 09:35:07 2010 +0200
> >>
> >>     Upgrade to CGI.pm 3.49
> >
> > So, our policy says that we shouldn't be sending this whole update back
> > to maint. But there _is_ a security fix in there, as well as a
> > regression that seems "important" to deal with for maint.
> >
> > Do we want to cherry-pick just those bits? Since there's so little
> > actually _in_ this update other than those bits, do we just want to take
> > the whole module?
> >
> > Is this bikeshed teal or or cornflower blue?
> 
> I see very little point in including in perl a cpan module that
> doesn't have an exact counterpart on CPAN.
> 
> If really needed, we can ask the CPAN maintainer to release a special
> version X.Y.1 that corresponds to X.Y (shipped with 5.12.0 for
> eaxmple) plus one specific patch.
> 
> However, I really don't think it's worth the effort here (for the
> reasons you listed).

I'd like to nominate this change for backport to maint-5.12

-- 

Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About