On Thu, May 01, 2008 at 08:29:18AM -0700, Ray Lee wrote:
quoted text
> And as a policy suggestion, if we're past rc1 and someone has
> identified a commit as the root of a regression/bug, then the policy
> should be just to revert it immediately, no questions asked. Let the
> original author work with the person who identified the problem and
> resend a fixed commit later. We lose testers in the meantime, and
> perhaps the extra effort involved in having the author work out the
> issues and redo the patch will help prevent drive-by patching in the
> future.

you make a valid point here : "we lose testers in the meantime". Maybe
it would help if -rc2 would be released a few days after -rc1 with
the first most obvious showstoppers (often build issues). The most
problematic ones are often fixed within an hour or so, but for most
testers, it still means they have to wait for -rc2.

Most external testers might then only try -rc2 first, but that's not
a problem. What we really want is them to test widely and not revert
back at the first problem. If only 20% of testers try -rc1, and the
remaining 80% actively wait for -rc2 3 days after, then we'll get
broader testing in the first two weeks.

Willy

--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/