Blue Swirl <blauwir...@gmail.com> writes: > On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 7:41 PM, Hans de Goede <hdego...@redhat.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> >> On 12/05/2012 08:28 PM, Blue Swirl wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 10:00 PM, Anthony Liguori <aligu...@us.ibm.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> writes: >>>> >>>>> On 4 December 2012 18:38, Blue Swirl <blauwir...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> The definition of the hard freeze bothers me. A few patches that went >>>>>> in after 1.3-rc0 were not bug fixes but just new features, so the >>>>>> difference between soft and hard freezes was not clear. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> My vote for this would be to adhere to our definition >>>>> and only commit bugfixes. >>>> >>>> >>>> Let's get specific. What was committed post hard freeze that's not a >>>> bug fix? >>> >>> >>> d3067b0 Documentation: Update image format information >>> a13e5e0 Documentation: Update block cache mode information >>> 044d003 qemu-tech.texi: update implemented xtensa features list >> >> >> Adding missing / updating docs to be more accurate is a bug fix, >> and one with a very low chance of causing regressions at that. > > I don't think they are bug fixes but improvements to documentation > features. But I agree patches only touching documentation, comment and > string contents could be exempted.
What about improvements to tests? No impact on anything but "make check". [...]
