From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 19 17:25:40 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DB9F106566B; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 17:25:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from zim.MIT.EDU (ZIM.MIT.EDU [18.95.3.101]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 330358FC13; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 17:25:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from zim.MIT.EDU (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zim.MIT.EDU (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m2JHRsVa044921; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 13:27:54 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: (from das@localhost) by zim.MIT.EDU (8.14.2/8.14.2/Submit) id m2JHRsir044920; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 13:27:54 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 13:27:54 -0400 From: David Schultz To: Paolo Pisati Message-ID: <20080319172754.GB44884@zim.MIT.EDU> Mail-Followup-To: Paolo Pisati , src-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG References: <200803191150.m2JBoj6j020138@repoman.freebsd.org> <20080319165336.GA44656@zim.MIT.EDU> <20080319165522.GA95772@tin.it> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080319165522.GA95772@tin.it> Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG, src-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/netinet/libalias alias_db.c alias_irc.c X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 17:25:40 -0000 On Wed, Mar 19, 2008, Paolo Pisati wrote: > On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 12:53:36PM -0400, David Schultz wrote: > > > > By the way, is any of this security-relevant, or is there a > > different reason why most of your recent commits have been > > insta-MFCed? Usually things are given a chance to sit in HEAD for > > a few days so that any problems get caught before the changes are > > MFCed. > > no, but the fix was trivial so i decided to MFC immediately. Yes, but isn't it the case that it's a fix for a bug in another change that also got insta-MFCed? The point is that even "trivial" changes often have unexpected problems, e.g., they don't compile for some random architecture, so it's often a good idea to let them settle to avoid breaking STABLE.