Re: 64.auth_type

[Randy Terbush <ra...@zyzzyva.com>]

> On another topic.
> 
> The concern that the latest *stable* (non-beta) release is functionally
> complete is going to lead us down the path of constantly retreading
> 1.0.1, 1.0.2, 1.0.3 for every desirable but non-critical patch that
> comes along...
> 
> 	[64.auth_type may be fixing *really* broken behaviour, I'm not
> 	leveling the observation at this specific patch]
> 
> ...it's clearly a grey area about which David and I disagree; I'm quite
> happy to be re-educated, it's just a little confusing at the moment.
> 
> Ay.

64.auth_type (IMO) is a patch that could be made publically
available as a patch and be done with it. It is not a showstopper.
The fact that we are re-rolling this thing seems to be a good time
to include it.

IMO - 1.0 should only be patched and re-released for showstopper
bugs.