Re: Requesting MFC's

2016-02-03 Thread Kubilay Kocak
On 4/02/2016 5:44 PM, Allan Jude wrote: > On 2016-02-04 01:15, Kubilay Kocak wrote: >> On 4/02/2016 1:32 PM, Matthew Grooms wrote: >>> All, >>> >>> What is the correct way to request that patches be committed to STABLE? >>> In particular, I'd really like to see these in 10.3-RELEASE as they have >>

Re: Requesting MFC's

2016-02-03 Thread Allan Jude
On 2016-02-04 01:15, Kubilay Kocak wrote: > On 4/02/2016 1:32 PM, Matthew Grooms wrote: >> All, >> >> What is the correct way to request that patches be committed to STABLE? >> In particular, I'd really like to see these in 10.3-RELEASE as they have >> been required to build a working firewall in s

Re: Requesting MFC's

2016-02-03 Thread Kubilay Kocak
On 4/02/2016 1:32 PM, Matthew Grooms wrote: > All, > > What is the correct way to request that patches be committed to STABLE? > In particular, I'd really like to see these in 10.3-RELEASE as they have > been required to build a working firewall in some cases. All are related > to problems that we

Re: Requesting MFC's

2016-02-03 Thread NGie Cooper
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 6:32 PM, Matthew Grooms wrote: > All, > > What is the correct way to request that patches be committed to STABLE? In > particular, I'd really like to see these in 10.3-RELEASE as they have been > required to build a working firewall in some cases. All are related to > proble

Requesting MFC's

2016-02-03 Thread Matthew Grooms
All, What is the correct way to request that patches be committed to STABLE? In particular, I'd really like to see these in 10.3-RELEASE as they have been required to build a working firewall in some cases. All are related to problems that were fixed in HEAD, but never MFC'd ... https://svnw