Dear Graeme Russ, In message <4f019473.8000...@gmail.com> you wrote: > > The problem is not one of how sparsely the test/fix cycles are spread over > time, it is one of spreading the breakage over multiple patches - If you > are replacing functionality then add the new functionality, add the hooks > to use it and delete the old in a single patch. That way, if you change > breaks something, the revert is trivial. If you multi-patch approach breaks > something, the revert becomes more difficult.
True. Especially as it's likely that different patches will break different boards, so there will not even be a chance so revert. > > Well I don't propose to create things which are not bisect-able. I > > But you have - You create new functionality in one patch, add a number of > patches, then finally use that new functionality in a later patch. This is what I fear as well. Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de Disc space - the final frontier! _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
