Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from September 2019
On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 7:07 AM Tom Hukins <tom@eborcom.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 02:02:13PM -0700, James E Keenan via RT wrote: > > On Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:53:03 GMT, csjewell wrote: > > > Here it is: https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=133295 > > > > Curtis, thanks for that research! > > > > Closing this ticket. > > So, perl users have now reported this issue against 5.28.x twice. We've > fixed the problem in 5.30, but left if unaddressed in 5.28. > > What's the advantage of taking no action and closing this ticket instead > of backporting the fix to origin/maint-5.28? I don't know the > backporting policy well, but this strikes me as a missed opportunity. I think we often assume that all modules are dual-life because most of the ones included in core are, and dual-life modules are explicitly excluded from what's eligible for backport in L<perlpolicy/MAINTENANCE BRANCHES>. However, as far as I can find, GDBM_File is core-only, so you are right, this seems like a reasonable candidate for a backport, and Steve Hay already added it to the 5.28 voting file months ago: <https://perl5.git.perl.org/perl.git/commitdiff/afa340664e8ce4c80cf4be87e92aab06ab9d7b70> <https://perl5.git.perl.org/perl.git/blob/refs/heads/maint-votes:/votes-5.28.xml#l54> It looks like it needs one more vote to make into the next maint release.Thread Previous | Thread Next