Identifying special patches [PSARC/2009/012 FastTrack timeout 01/16/2009]

[James Carlson]

Garrett D'Amore writes:
> I think it doesn't qualify for automatic approval.  I suspect the 
> special numbering will be the cause of some consternation.  I'm not sure 
> what number we're up to on our patching, but when will we run into the 
> problem where our patch numbers don't work?

I don't see the problem you do.  Who cares about the numbering system
used for patch IDs, and how is any numbering choice for a patch an
architectural issue to begin with?

I see it as only goodness -- it makes it clear (to anyone who cares)
that these are very special "patches" and don't really exist anywhere
other than inside the fiction of updates.

> If the idea of using a special patch prefix letter (outside of the 
> numbering space) is not acceptable for some reason, then I'm willing to 
> hold my nose and give this a +1.  I'd still like confirmation from the 
> project team as to whether the idea was considered, and if it was 
> rejected, I'd like to know why.

Likely because it requires zero change in the tools.

-- 
James Carlson, Solaris Networking              <james.d.carlson at sun.com>
Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive        71.232W   Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.496N   Fax +1 781 442 1677