New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
apps: Stop pretending to care about Netscape keys #7440
apps: Stop pretending to care about Netscape keys #7440
Conversation
The documentation says some commands care, but the code says differently.
Nice! |
LGTM. But I'm in doubt whether this change is allowed to be backported to 1.1.1: even if the option was previously ignored (effectively), after your change the command fails because an unknown option is passed. This could break existing scripts. It might be unlikely that this is the case, but formally, it is a breaking change. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
For master only. I agree that for 1.1.1 it is an API change.
Ah... I could leave the option in with a comment, in |
IMO ignoring the option is ok if it didn't work previously anyway. Would it be reasonable to a warning on stderr, too? |
It's been ignored since July 2015, as off 0bc2f36 So basically, the last time it was at all used was with 1.0.2 |
BTW, this doesn't break anything in 1.1.1, it's already broken in this respect (and [ahem] hilariously so, I might add):
So I still think this should be cherry-picked back to 1.1.1. |
Replacing a failure by a more sensible failure is not a regression, it's a bugfix. So in this case, go ahead to cherry-pick it, if @paulidale approves. |
@paulidale, after the deliberation here, do you approve cherry-picking back to 1.1.1? |
Yes, 1.1.1 is good too. Broken is broken and I don't mind why. |
The documentation says some commands care, but the code says differently. Reviewed-by: Paul Dale <paul.dale@oracle.com> (Merged from #7440)
The documentation says some commands care, but the code says differently.