From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 20 16:28:10 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C456F4A7 for ; Tue, 20 Nov 2012 16:28:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ohartman@zedat.fu-berlin.de) Received: from outpost1.zedat.fu-berlin.de (outpost1.zedat.fu-berlin.de [130.133.4.66]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DB7E8FC0C for ; Tue, 20 Nov 2012 16:28:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from inpost2.zedat.fu-berlin.de ([130.133.4.69]) by outpost1.zedat.fu-berlin.de (Exim 4.69) for freebsd-current@freebsd.org with esmtp (envelope-from ) id <1Taqg6-002bqx-TY>; Tue, 20 Nov 2012 17:28:02 +0100 Received: from telesto.geoinf.fu-berlin.de ([130.133.86.198]) by inpost2.zedat.fu-berlin.de (Exim 4.69) for freebsd-current@freebsd.org with esmtpsa (envelope-from ) id <1Taqg6-002Sll-RI>; Tue, 20 Nov 2012 17:28:02 +0100 Message-ID: <50ABAF8E.3020101@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 17:27:58 +0100 From: "O. Hartmann" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121115 Thunderbird/16.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Upgrading FreeBSD to use the NEW pf syntax. (Copied from freebsd-pf) References: In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.6 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigA6FCD05271D63D8A69A7B964" X-Originating-IP: 130.133.86.198 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 16:28:10 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigA6FCD05271D63D8A69A7B964 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 11/20/12 11:43, Olivier Smedts wrote: > 2012/11/20 Paul Webster : >> I am aware this is a much discussed subject since the upgrade of PF, I= >> believe the final decision was that to many users are used to the old >> style pf and an upgrade to the new syntax would cause to much confusio= n. >=20 > But a change like this is expected in a new major branch, ie. > 10-CURRENT. Not so in -STABLE branches of course. I don't see the > problem here. >=20 > Cheers >=20 What would be the alternative? Being stuck with the old PF? As Olivier Smedts said, changes like that are expected in a complete new branch. If people need to stay compatible, they are about to use 9.X as long as they have migrated. The downside is more work. The bright side would be development/progression. oh --------------enigA6FCD05271D63D8A69A7B964 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQq6+SAAoJEOgBcD7A/5N84IEIAIp3FPTktCz0gBXLgJFRFCOj tkb1HVacBh+VQ6XcDwGlWqPchlav2/nttnxfsHdlV8faFxMm5ZVyF5zxnPRpsflj fDzlwD/X8wawApq6ALV9rtEj0zo3Q/1n66QED6zpsAOSIwFYdKEpO4cvedlEeDGn 07u5dHXuVC4hvQZRx091dzNdW5EfBdI2KAm0+oCeFugu25itPU5SrfY9Cho+6J8F V53/if1wRJFA50cqFUPRaw1qRAm8Y9D/tb1tusPZziqOSt5xls7W0SOCoOJ8AqmB yXgNdwxwz0U2nhNM2lz780Rsis+n4CIP9moHc/Yas4oqaAmrkrBkSq6G69vXQ1s= =BVmQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigA6FCD05271D63D8A69A7B964--