Should 6838 (renew broken) be a 1.9 blocker?

[Tom Yu]

Tom Yu <tlyu at MIT.EDU> writes:

> Sam Hartman <hartmans at MIT.EDU> writes:
>
>> The renewal behavior in 1.9 has broken with regard to 1.6 and 1.7 and
>> probably 1.8 although I cannot be entirely sure.  I at least find this a
>> significant annoyance and regression.  Should this be a blocker or not?
>
> Is this behavior change occurring on the KDC side or the client side?
> If we can quickly determine that it was broken in 1.8, I wouldn't
> necessarily classify it as a blocker.

I confirmed that 1.8 isn't broken in this way.