From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7787D93E for ; Tue, 14 Jul 2015 15:56:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mezzanine.sirena.org.uk (mezzanine.sirena.org.uk [106.187.55.193]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 27613110 for ; Tue, 14 Jul 2015 15:56:56 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2015 16:56:48 +0100 From: Mark Brown To: Sasha Levin Message-ID: <20150714155648.GA11162@sirena.org.uk> References: <55A26C5B.8060007@oracle.com> <20150713105210.6e367f4b@noble> <55A33E48.2040202@oracle.com> <20150713142132.08fead4d@gandalf.local.home> <55A45AD8.5010400@oracle.com> <20150713210226.519dedfd@gandalf.local.home> <20150714104623.GQ11162@sirena.org.uk> <55A51548.4040502@oracle.com> <20150714152515.GX11162@sirena.org.uk> <55A52B8B.5060606@oracle.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="S2FiTZAGpJjpxPt0" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <55A52B8B.5060606@oracle.com> Cc: "ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] Issues with stable process List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , --S2FiTZAGpJjpxPt0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 11:32:27AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote: Re-wrapped the text, it looks like something joined all the paragraphs up into single lines. > > 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. > If there's an issue that causes that effect then the original commit that > caused it should be reverted rather than introducing an untested fix right > away. > Obviously not a hard rule, but it should be the case in general. That's still sending a change of course which was what was being objected to. --S2FiTZAGpJjpxPt0 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJVpTE/AAoJECTWi3JdVIfQH40H+QEMvTjlmkta61TtmfYsFYQF RpoB0ca+iicEbTnwHyPB/SbKFBqfGBM4E9MxlQb57guwZLDpwvomjeozBBC4epfZ lFmcoSB824PpJcIz4wJQKV7z4q1k2x7TfQzufWk0s30GAXzGD+mv/5gAjBtkp8TB 4YTHs0MdR5F/P3WaTJl+x0a2pyiOS0hbOizhOvqKrCYlE5HHfo5mCKxJLUAljk79 8QGdB+G2dRf46pOsERtDDW+6lsy+u1E7vGyq8vneXspWJaJ5inxWdT5KRLcHrKwS OzLiJ3g7bbyFWQxn+3XDGusUG2JDJaixcGBnQvqWRe5RxrUCVMMULF77Yrm8Dps= =2SKT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --S2FiTZAGpJjpxPt0--