wireshark-dev August 2010 archive
Main Archive Page > Month Archives  > wireshark-dev archives
wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Remove old packet list code i

Re: [Wireshark-dev] Remove old packet list code in trunk?

From: Anders Broman <anders.broman_at_nospam>
Date: Thu Aug 19 2010 - 07:54:53 GMT
To: Developer support list for Wireshark <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>

 

-----Original Message-----
From: wireshark-dev-bounces@wireshark.org [mailto:wireshark-dev-bounces@wireshark.org] On Behalf Of Jaap Keuter
Sent: den 19 augusti 2010 08:04
To: Developer support list for Wireshark
Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Remove old packet list code in trunk?

On 08/19/2010 02:15 AM, Gerald Combs wrote:
>> Jaap Keuter wrote:
>>> On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 11:14:43 +0200, Anders Broman
>>> <anders.broman@ericsson.com> wrote:
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: wireshark-dev-bounces@wireshark.org
>>>>> [mailto:wireshark-dev-bounces@wireshark.org] On Behalf Of Jaap
>>>>> Keuter
>>>>> Sent: den 18 augusti 2010 11:02
>>>>> To: Developer support list for Wireshark
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Remove old packet list code in trunk?
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Mind you that it would make back porting to trunk-1.4 of packet
>>>>> list related code more difficult since the source code will diverge.
>>>>> That means more manual back porting, which is more laborious and error prone (sorry Gerald).
>>>>>
>>>>> I would suggest holding off on stripping trunk of old packet list code, but not to maintain it. After we put>1.4.1 'in the wild' and survives real user scrutiny it time to start ripping it out IMHO.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Jaap
>>>> I agree with you, just to be clear not having NEW_PACKET_LIST
>>>> defined is not expected to Work in trunk any more. Perhapps adding
>>>> comments about that and/or change it to #if 0 if edditing a file for
>>>> Other reasons?
>>>> Regards
>>>> Anders
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> The only thing to be done in trunk is to remove the configuration
>>> option or add a 'no longer functional' remark to the item Changing to
>>> #if 0 would also invalidate patches for back porting.
>>
>> Would moving to Git or Mercurial help for this?
I'm not keen on changing because of the learning curve and the hassle of setting everything up to work
Trough proxies etc again.

>I don't see how another revision control system helps with porting incompatible patches between branches.
I guess porting will always be a problem for the files with extensive changes that are not to be backported.
/Anders
>Thanks,
>Jaap
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>
Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>
Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe