On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 6:43 AM, Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 04/05/11 03:49, Diego Novillo wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 10:50, Eric Botcazou <ebotca...@adacore.com> wrote: >>>> 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. >>> >>> This weekends/holidays allowance would be dangerous and counter-productive: >>> people would rush to install risky changes on Friday and leave for the >>> week-end fingers crossed. This would be worse than the current policy IMO. >> >> I agree. If it's broken, it should be taken out. It doesn't make a >> lot of difference to the patch owner, and if the fix takes more than a >> day or so to be produced, then the cost of the breakage is much >> higher. As an example, I recently broke ObjC++, and the fix for it >> took more than 3-4 days to get in. My patch should've been reverted >> in the meantime. > It can make a huge difference if the owner has been unable to reproduce > and is waiting on the reporter to provide enough information to > reproduce or debug the problem.
In the case of PR 48403, it seems that most of developers see it. Only very few people weren't affected. I don't think everyone else should stop and wait for developer to reproduce it. -- H.J.
