From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-GM-THRID: 6818905211330887680 X-Received: by 2002:a5d:4111:: with SMTP id l17mr14885wrp.296.1588917776481; Thu, 07 May 2020 23:02:56 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: isar-users@googlegroups.com Received: by 2002:adf:9544:: with SMTP id 62ls193047wrs.1.gmail; Thu, 07 May 2020 23:02:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypKHPaUCAuNbWlSykjRA7ib4ksdlh8pAn7sVjlUh+bZS8INDGIxzcQa8eP1cahizPhJcPtGi X-Received: by 2002:adf:d4c6:: with SMTP id w6mr966636wrk.92.1588917775881; Thu, 07 May 2020 23:02:55 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1588917775; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=Dm5gADRxdq3J0NBNg0OdRR+PQB8YfdXT13SFf6XwRQRybhYNAX9jQ+421luDkQQW2W x2h971vyBlDJ08Jiwuz9VIIXa+WtkPjwGg2xFh20e6bCWlRIwmAsQVPl/Tqh2/5vQbgD tB+3wJl/P51zf1BZ8f39lvnfjXUmcSz2I/tHCTjX9Y8QgL7vb3DoeU0DqqiuduupToLU nBMo/RTBW+RRXR/MPwPqDMnjPHfs+a+J3pS8ktsTKpacnf0F249Kz4ADeEg/ET05TjGc eAF8e0URhEfGADoy73Rl4mQAZ1lcuytmAhvrEZ4ZSMYOibl8uCrVPpq1EbWszNMz0ntn GLpw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=user-agent:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references :mail-followup-to:message-id:subject:to:from:date; bh=e5wfU4bF5sVUf9uk8e/odM8bHymct48csWUGA9+YQdE=; b=XV0CDgzM86LtST/1XILCVmDgvh51z8GI1mWIHDi+eBSIq0mypyzo+xozKPl5qK/dOk PHZbGH+tXCBLRBv8KpBKfRxsa6zsBpG6MrLad/X3eNhs491s1jQqtCBPISXOF+BZxjkl WHpOdEvHmdG3J9ZPA8ytX2sc84Y4Lt+XhQivz43+Y1In7fJ4W6s4gXjY2cMLlukBjWLx EyEhXnkRJGh/u1ug7ODrPyN8e+tZXjBxs+25eC9zVJ2Wb1iMdgYzAU69c+grY4Q/DjDl RQmnyQEpTGiaD/nGnyHfjwgBp68P6D00UWeZOwoYvcDETruAodnHhlBDWASR45cfZcVP eaMQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 85.214.156.166 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of ibr@radix50.net) smtp.mailfrom=ibr@radix50.net Return-Path: Received: from shymkent.ilbers.de (shymkent.ilbers.de. [85.214.156.166]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id q17si551702wmg.1.2020.05.07.23.02.55 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Thu, 07 May 2020 23:02:55 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 85.214.156.166 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of ibr@radix50.net) client-ip=85.214.156.166; Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 85.214.156.166 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of ibr@radix50.net) smtp.mailfrom=ibr@radix50.net Received: from yssyq.m.ilbers.de (host-80-81-17-52.static.customer.m-online.net [80.81.17.52]) (authenticated bits=0) by shymkent.ilbers.de (8.15.2/8.15.2/Debian-8) with ESMTPSA id 04862qTS012497 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 8 May 2020 08:02:55 +0200 Date: Fri, 8 May 2020 08:02:52 +0200 From: Baurzhan Ismagulov To: isar-users Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] debianize: Add placeholder for original version to CHANGELOG_V Message-ID: <20200508060252.gsbrpsxhdij45ytz@yssyq.m.ilbers.de> Mail-Followup-To: isar-users References: <20200507194502.cnjs6ftfcyj3ugdh@yssyq.m.ilbers.de> <20200507220215.66937111@md1za8fc.ad001.siemens.net> <20200507202828.z3pax2l3xgygd7a2@yssyq.m.ilbers.de> <20200508074505.16c67b3c@md1za8fc.ad001.siemens.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200508074505.16c67b3c@md1za8fc.ad001.siemens.net> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on shymkent.ilbers.de X-TUID: JUzL7yb/TodO On Fri, May 08, 2020 at 07:45:05AM +0200, Henning Schild wrote: > > Oops, I haven't seen the intention to do that, have I overlooked > > anything? I've stated the reason in the next mail -- sorry for > > one-side decision. If there is consensus on a working approach, I'd > > of course welcome that. > > It was hard to see. The follow up kind of questions this series and the > discussion is still ongoing. > > > > Not sure how to deal with the premature merge now. > > > > The final solution can be applied on top, or I can revert the patches > > if that would help. > > The feature will potentially vanish or work differently. That should be > clear for users. Since isar master is slow many users are on next. Next > does not seem to ever rebase. > So i say we need to finish the discussion eventually. Until then > potentially revert the commits to prevent users jumping on a feature > that will be harder to repair once its out there. > > Let us see what Jan has to say. Maybe the discussion only seems open > because the points i raised are not valid in his opinion. I see, thanks for the explanations. IMHO, your points are perfectly valid and addressing them would be a good structural improvement. OTOH, Jan's use case doesn't go away, and his change works as is. But I agree we should finish the discussion. With kind regards, Baurzhan.