Steffen Prohaska <prohaska@zib.de> writes:By definition of 'maint', 1.5.4.X are to fix bugs in the features that are in 1.5.4, so the answer is no. But we could end up having a short cycle for 1.5.5 if we agree that the lack of crlf=safe is a severe bug that is worth fixing post 1.5.4. Currently I am not convinced that the lack of crlf=safe is a severe and urgent bug worth "fixing" for 1.5.4. I see it as a new feature, a different variant of crlf behaviour we will be introducing for audience who are not satisfied with existing the crlf variants. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
| debian developer | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 002/196] Chinese: rephrase English introduction in HOWTO |
| Linus Torvalds | Re: Long delay in resume from RAM (Was Re: [patch 00/69] -stablereview) |
| Parag Warudkar | BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 15s! [swapper:0] |
git: | |
| Andi Kleen | [PATCH RFC] [4/9] modpost: Fix format string warnings |
| Rick Jones | Re: Network latency regressions from 2.6.22 to 2.6.29 |
| Antonio Almeida | HTB accuracy for high speed |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
