Re: Backport request for proto_tree_add_subtree[_format]

[Guy Harris <guy () alum mit edu>]

On Jul 10, 2014, at 2:18 PM, Peter Wu <peter () lekensteyn nl> wrote:

> I would like to have the proto_tree_add_subtree and 
> proto_tree_add_subtree_format functions backported to master-1.12. Any objects 
> to that? It is only a new addition to the API, so it should be pretty safe.
>
> It should make backporting changes easier. (read: backport a refactoring (WIP) 
> to reduce code duplication in the SSL and DTLS dissectors.)

If the refactoring merely cleans up working code, producing code that doesn't appear different to the end user (old 
code dissects as well as new code, crashes no more than new code, etc.), it's probably not worth backporting it.

If the refactoring fixes bugs, or makes it easier to fix existing bugs, that might make it worth backporting.
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe