doing a new upstream microrelease with important cherrypicks sounds excellent in general, and might also benefit other people/distros that way. In general I'm not so much concerned whether something is called 1.34+patches or 1.35, but rather whether the changes have a considerable potential to cause regressions. In general, 10 known bugs are better than introducing one new one. OTOH, with hardy being an LTS, backporting safe patches is a real benefit for users, and thus will be widely appreciated.
So we should make sure to have a good QA cycle on that, but otherwise I'm fine with this.
Charles,
doing a new upstream microrelease with important cherrypicks sounds excellent in general, and might also benefit other people/distros that way. In general I'm not so much concerned whether something is called 1.34+patches or 1.35, but rather whether the changes have a considerable potential to cause regressions. In general, 10 known bugs are better than introducing one new one. OTOH, with hardy being an LTS, backporting safe patches is a real benefit for users, and thus will be widely appreciated.
So we should make sure to have a good QA cycle on that, but otherwise I'm fine with this.
Thank you!