Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Can some minor enhancements be moved to the 1.0 trunk ?
Okay, now I understand, thank you Jaap.
--
Michael Lum Principal Software Engineer
4600 Jacombs Road +1.604.276.0055
Richmond, B.C.
Canada V6V 3B1
Star Solutions
> -----Original Message-----
> From: wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jaap Keuter
> Sent: February 24, 2009 10:01 PM
> To: Developer support list for Wireshark
> Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Can some minor enhancements be
> moved to the 1.0 trunk ?
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> These 'Update Protocol Support' changes explicitly list the
> protocols that have been affected by the above given Security
> Advisories and Bug Fixes. That is all.
>
> Thanx,
> Jaap
>
> Michael Lum wrote:
> > Hi Jaap,
> >
> > I understand all about development and time.
> >
> > I don't see the difference between what I have done and support for
> > new capture file formats as per 1.0.4 or all of the
> 'Updated Protocol
> > Support' changes listed in the release notes.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > --
> > Michael Lum Principal Software Engineer
> > 4600 Jacombs Road +1.604.276.0055
> > Richmond, B.C.
> > Canada V6V 3B1
> > Star Solutions
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> [mailto:wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> Jaap Keuter
> >> Sent: February 24, 2009 1:50 PM
> >> To: Developer support list for Wireshark
> >> Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Can some minor enhancements
> be moved to
> >> the 1.0 trunk ?
> >>
> >> Hi Michael,
> >>
> >> I'm sorry but you need to understand that a stable release is a
> >> stable release.
> >> No new features, enhancements or the like go in. Only bugfixes are
> >> backported from development to the 1.0 branch.
> >> It all comes down to the allocation of the 'spare time'
> >> resource, something we're chronically short of. We better
> apply that
> >> to enhancing the development version, so that at
> >> SharkFest'09 a new, feature packed, stable release will see the
> >> light, and the 1.0 branch be 'abandoned'.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Jaap
> >>
> >> Michael Lum wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I added some enhancements to some protocols and one additional
> >>> dissector (RFC3558 header) thinking they would be included in
> >>> Wireshark 1.0.5/1.0.6.
> >>>
> >>> But now that I have read the development roadmap I see that
> >> they would
> >>> not appear until 1.2.0.
> >>>
> >>> Could the following be applied to the 1.0 trunk for
> release 1.0.7 ?
> >>>
> >>>> 3083 Enh Low Wind
> >> wireshark-bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx RESO
> >>>> FIXE RFC3558 header dissection (EVRC in RTP)
> >>>> 3084 Enh Low Wind
> >> wireshark-bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx RESO
> >>>> FIXE Added EVRC-WB mime types to dynamic clock rate list
> >>>> 3100 Enh Low Wind
> >> wireshark-bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx RESO
> >>>> FIXE Minor enhancement for for MEID/pESN
> >>>> 3182 Enh Low Wind
> >> wireshark-bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx RESO
> >>>> FIXE Added support for Capabilities Information
> >> message and MEID
> >>>> 3204 Enh Low Wind
> >> wireshark-bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx RESO
> >>>> FIXE Brought up to date with version C of the specification
> >>> Thanks
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Michael Lum Principal Software Engineer
> >>> 4600 Jacombs Road +1.604.276.0055
> >>> Richmond, B.C.
> >>> Canada V6V 3B1
> >>> Star Solutions
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> _____________
> Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
>
> mailto:wireshark-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
>
