Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 15:26:17 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Cc: Marcelo Araujo <araujo@freebsd.org>, Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, fcp@freebsd.org, Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, Li-Wen Hsu <lwhsu@freebsd.org>, Kristof Provost <kp@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: FCP 20190401-ci_policy: CI policy Message-ID: <CANCZdfoYNn9Xcyds_YbDXMLTrMdmTewvP_pK7FSDAPbDAeV6Lw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201908291905.x7TJ5Bw8091371@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> References: <CAOfEmZgEbT7ni80vWehHm%2B4oPyH3m%2Brb0M_VyxHmNM3rkhyG1Q@mail.gmail.com> <201908291905.x7TJ5Bw8091371@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 1:05 PM Rodney W. Grimes < freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> wrote: > (unneeded context removed) > > > > In either scenario we end up reducing test coverage, which means we?re > > > going to push more bugs towards users. > > > > > > > I totally agree. This is an overly-bureaucratic solution in search > of > > > > a problem. > > > > > > > > If this needs to be addressed at all (and I'm not sure it does), then > > > > another sentence or two in bullet item 10 in section 18.1 [*] of the > > > > committer's guide should be enough. And even then it needn't be > > > > overly-formal and should just mention that if a commit does break the > > > > build the committer is expected to be responsive to that problem and > > > > the commit might get reverted if they're unresponsive. I don't think > > > > we need schedules. > > > > > > > I do feel that?s a better argument. We?ve always had a policy of > > > reverting on request (AIUI), so this is more or less trying to be a > > > strong restatement of that, more than a fundamental shift in policy. > > > > > > > We don't have a policy to revert commit, actually revert commit is > > something bad, it is kind of punishment, I have been there, nobody wants > to > > be there. Stop to push this non-sense argument. > > Here in lies one of the fundemental problems, this view by some that > a "revert commit is something bad, it is kind of punishment". That is > not true. Reverts are GREAT things, they allow the tree to be returned > to a known state, usually quicly. The original commit is STILL IN SVN, > and a bad revert can guess what.. be reverted!. > > IMHO the project as a whole needs to overcome its fear of reverts and > start to use them for the great and powerful things that they are. > > This connection of bad and punishment needs to stop, and the sooner > the better. > > -- > Rod Grimes > rgrimes@freebsd.org > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-fcp@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fcp > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fcp-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CANCZdfoYNn9Xcyds_YbDXMLTrMdmTewvP_pK7FSDAPbDAeV6Lw>