From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 11 23:20:28 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7D5916A41A for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 23:20:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mozolevsky@gmail.com) Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.172]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FD6513C44B for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 23:20:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mozolevsky@gmail.com) Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id y2so756668uge.37 for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 15:20:27 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=M4myrnQ+WSGQ0Bh9z5gMU6DOyhbWM1X6ROSY6MFeD8c=; b=JCfg32NcS/EUeGNYANkisySaM3wfb7lJyYgO5qIYQAEhrDACM1kw8nCI7HW7cAmCmW5Z+SODU5kF3ajjXgJL7BfU0y04FnGWnRXjGAo2PLVUJrztgqoYXAMs4QWpY4BdHhpmHgCz4L46C3ed1Q6UeQpZpcmwNdN2DXQH/czd+dA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=FEWzuYM5jYLPzK5hEwGv9uo9rGjpR237jPCLSX/4CiIgZmmGbZjcAHAJjKGb6vQUQvU8Yxryk168C9sA7MxKmfV2yDzhYTH/E+/2D2D0UtcaUNBBTBUEmReJxLnbDMHRZmgfxKZkZ9HyBXOGaVNz8mXSjbxfHkVFCQ+JS2VRtt4= Received: by 10.67.195.14 with SMTP id x14mr742307ugp.40.1200093626863; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 15:20:26 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.66.248.11 with HTTP; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 15:20:26 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 23:20:26 +0000 From: "Igor Mozolevsky" Sender: mozolevsky@gmail.com To: ticso@cicely.de In-Reply-To: <20080111211019.GC79270@cicely12.cicely.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <478556AD.6090400@bsdforen.de> <20080110003524.GB5188@soaustin.net> <200801111935.50821.peter.schuller@infidyne.com> <20080111211019.GC79270@cicely12.cicely.de> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 964ac69c1274a535 Cc: Mark Linimon , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Peter Schuller Subject: Re: Improving the handling of PR:s X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 23:20:28 -0000 On 11/01/2008, Bernd Walter wrote: > Another point about hardware is that a patch might influence other > hardware handled by the same driver, which can't be verified by the > submitter nor the committer. > This is especially true with workarounds, which might only be required > for specific chip revisions. Which can only be verified/fixed once the patch is merged into a branch and new PRs are filed, if everyone used the approach of "let's not touch it because something might go wrong", nobody would fly because they might be involved in a plane-crash (of a similar model of a plane, just slightly different configuration)... The procedure would be effectively: patch->commit->[fixed|PR->limit the scope of the patch->commit]+ Drawback: more work for the committers. Advantages: people feel rewarded for contributing patches, more hardware support... Voila! Igor :-)