On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 09:57:28AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:

Re-wrapped the text, it looks like something joined all the paragraphs
up into single lines.

> On 07/14/2015 06:46 AM, Mark Brown wrote:

> > Indeed depending on the bug having things forced to sit in -next for
> > too long can be a real problem - I've had people refusing to fix
> > build errors in Linus' tree for a week as they wanted things to cook
> > in -next which took out automated testing of Linus' tree (and
> > anything that merged it) for the duration.

> I don't agree that letting things cook in -next is hurting anyone: if it's
> a critical bug then Linus should probably delay releasing a final before
> it's been resolved, and if it's not then there's no harm for letting it
> sit outside for a bit.

If the issue being fixed is serious enough to take out substantial
portion of our test coverage or affect a lot of other development usage
then that's really disruptive to other work, it impacts things like
bisection for example.  A strong rule does nobody any good, it's
overkill for the problem.