On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 01:28:35PM +0200, Martin Kletzander wrote:
I wanted to back-port 736e017e as requested in Bug 1058149 [1], because it fixes a crash. However, it requires 5b3492fa and e9d09fe1 to be back-ported as well, so I wanted to confirm it's still OK when it's not a simple two-liner or similar (and combined with the low probability of the crash to happen). What's the stand on this?
If they cherry-pick cleanly, or with trivial resolution then it is fine to backport them to -maint branches without re-posting for review IMHO. If they have nasty conflicts to resolve, then post the backport for review first in normal way. Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|