From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs
Subject: bug#25061: consider adding %COMPAT to default gnutls priority string
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2017 16:12:20 +0200
Message-ID: <83indeu0xn.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <87zikiwpl6.fsf@igalia.com> <878trzo5ys.fsf@lifelogs.com>
	<87fum7o0qu.fsf@gnu.org> <87zikfmiiy.fsf@lifelogs.com>
	<878tq0dqgw.fsf@gnus.org> <87sho1gemz.fsf@gnu.org>
	<87vasigi2c.fsf@igalia.com> <871sv2krfc.fsf@lifelogs.com>
	<8360d1yzvj.fsf@gnu.org> <877exbhbc5.fsf@lifelogs.com>
	<87k21bj7sb.fsf@detlef> <87y3phgf3a.fsf@lifelogs.com>
	<83k210mr8l.fsf@gnu.org> <83374t117z.fsf@gnu.org>
	<87a7yra2bz.fsf@lifelogs.com> <83o9n7t669.fsf@gnu.org>
	<87k1xu90eg.fsf@lifelogs.com>
Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org
X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1512915258 2728 195.159.176.226 (10 Dec 2017 14:14:18 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:14:18 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: wingo@igalia.com, 25061@debbugs.gnu.org, ludo@gnu.org,
	michael.albinus@gmx.de, larsi@gnus.org
To: Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com>
Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 10 15:14:07 2017
Return-path: <bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org
Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17])
	by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>)
	id 1eO2Mp-0000HA-56
	for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 15:14:07 +0100
Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44848 helo=lists.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>)
	id 1eO2Mw-0008Ny-6g
	for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 09:14:14 -0500
Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46494)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1eO2Ml-0008Nk-VS
	for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 09:14:10 -0500
Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1eO2Ml-0004Cp-1B
	for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 09:14:03 -0500
Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:45940)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16)
	(Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1eO2Mk-0004C6-UF
	for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 09:14:02 -0500
Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1eO2Mk-00058q-I7
	for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 09:14:02 -0500
X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org
Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:14:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.25061.B25061.151291519819702@debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 25061
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
Original-Received: via spool by 25061-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B25061.151291519819702
	(code B ref 25061); Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:14:02 +0000
Original-Received: (at 25061) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Dec 2017 14:13:18 +0000
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54620 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1eO2Lx-00057a-Mi
	for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 09:13:18 -0500
Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:55306)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>) id 1eO2Ls-00057I-8r
	for 25061@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 09:13:12 -0500
Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>) id 1eO2Ll-0003In-Pn
	for 25061@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 09:13:03 -0500
Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:47107)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>)
	id 1eO2LL-00031E-NI; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 09:12:35 -0500
Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1940 helo=home-c4e4a596f7)
	by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256)
	(Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>)
	id 1eO2LL-0007fr-3q; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 09:12:35 -0500
In-reply-to: <87k1xu90eg.fsf@lifelogs.com> (message from Ted Zlatanov on Sun, 
	10 Dec 2017 08:29:27 -0500)
X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic]
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic]
X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43
X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
	the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/bug-gnu-emacs>,
	<mailto:bug-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnu-emacs/>
List-Post: <mailto:bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bug-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnu-emacs>,
	<mailto:bug-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs"
	<bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:140896
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.bugs/140896>

> From: Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com>
> Cc: wingo@igalia.com,  25061@debbugs.gnu.org,  ludo@gnu.org,  michael.albinus@gmx.de,  larsi@gnus.org
> Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2017 08:29:27 -0500
> 
> It would change behavior for everyone for the sake of fixing a few
> setups. Does %DUMBFW or %COMPAT create a risk that's not justified by
> the functionality it provides? These exceptions have a way of living
> long past their expiration date.
> 
> If we're confident that's the right thing, then let's change it in the
> release and add a note in the docs. I'm OK with the change; any other
> comments? What should be the actual string?

You mean, should we use %COMPAT or %DUMBFW?  I think the latter.  But
if no one can reproduce the problem and verify the fix, I think we
should simply describe the problem in PROBLEMS and leave the code
intact.

> Regardless, I'll make the connection profile changes in master, which
> gives us more time to find problems and provide a better integration for
> them.

Sounds good, thanks.