On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 8:42 AM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Jason, > > Double-checking things and I've noticed that this has gone under the > radar since due to simple typo - mesa-dev vs mesa-stable. > Regardless, the patch in question seems to depend on at least Sorry about that > 174f4900b294f939c85cfa94f5d8401ce73e5522 > Yes, this one is required > b7979a849bc185fbcab93a841eed692a10d61e25\ > This one shouldn't be > 80d3af812935978f01c9bb6d02102140383c4034 > This one is > 44760c100c3793718cc8d6cfb66852c4f72d7057 > This one shouldn't be. > > Where all of the above are refactoring/feature/performance patches. > The interest in perf. improvements is understandable, yet in those we > had at least one bug/issue fixed with commit > 157971e450c34ec430c295ff922c2e597294aba3. > Yes, there was. Only a bug in release mode but still... > So barring a very compelling reason these won't be in 13.0. > They do fix bugs... They're just not crushing "the universe is broken" sorts of bugs.
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
