On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 10:30 PM, Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 04/04/11 19:14, Bernd Schmidt wrote: >>> >> Another danger is getting a mob effect as in PR48403 (which I've also >> seen happen on other occasions) and getting the wrong set of patches >> reverted by trigger-happy people. To be blunt, there are some people on >> this list who tend to react panicky to bugs and skip proper analysis (as >> in this case); I don't want to encourage such folks to revert stuff >> willy-nilly. Sometimes you just need a bit of time and assistance from >> testers who actually see the problem to understand it. >> >> If there's a change in policy I'd at least make allowances for weekends. >> There's considerably less traffic on the mailing lists on Saturdays and >> Sundays, which suggests few people will be inconvenienced if the tree is >> broken during such a time. We also don't want everyone to only check >> things in on Mondays because they worry they'll come back after a >> weekend to find their stuff gone from the tree. > I definitely think that if there is a policy change that an allowance be > made for weekends/holidays and that if a patch has been identified and > the offender has acknowledged the issue and is actively working on the > problem give the offender time to resolve the issue.
If a developer breaks bootstrap and cannot fix it immediately, the patch should be reverted and the developer can fix the patch offline and re-merge the patch. The focus of the policy should not be the convenience of the developer who broke bootstrap on multiple targets. - David
