From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 12 10:16:31 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 44C1B16A46D for ; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 10:16:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mozolevsky@gmail.com) Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.174]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACB2113C467 for ; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 10:16:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mozolevsky@gmail.com) Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id y2so840246uge.37 for ; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 02:16:29 -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=0LfPwYUHjCQjzf4ALb8fVIVXhAUqbeBGVSHfC+28jLs=; b=eN/69f6POm5yty8U6X1vfzE3BvQBxyZtjwgLKRPb+iin1Qt4leEV27Z/E3E0HQ2+ok3J5xUk6wosy/hs5vTT+FaRu90xy/E4fRLOtrhj4f/nxDcazFlrv79XVdIilArK8H19T6wuAz0JtVq7yAMApJJuXgqyu6TfsiaSmHLgZtI= 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=piVCH7fIO05SxXhRNgFTmQF5Slk3ilyCKd620n7+RDM2JYk5tk42RyUBBZgeh4DPfVjq7PTH5MdzX6RqmFbMRVdArI/xvKMvYZ0A73j/kYOvExbKqlyhLhV0OxASt4WEyL98ardoNHJwSehXZdl7GB7ndxauQGOxJMF6VxMxVP0= Received: by 10.67.115.17 with SMTP id s17mr1312720ugm.56.1200132989170; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 02:16:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.66.248.11 with HTTP; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 02:16:29 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 10:16:29 +0000 From: "Igor Mozolevsky" Sender: mozolevsky@gmail.com To: ticso@cicely.de In-Reply-To: <20080112002305.GE79270@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> <20080112002305.GE79270@cicely12.cicely.de> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 7e20e852314f6f3d 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: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 10:16:31 -0000 On 12/01/2008, Bernd Walter wrote: > > Drawback: more work for the committers. > > Advantages: people feel rewarded for contributing patches, more > > hardware support... > > Yes and others with fine running hardware feel unsure about it. > The result are new reports or just other users that run away. > It is up to the commiter to get the balance of things that likely > don't break other HW and those that are risky and need further > verification. > If it is considered to risky the commiter has to find others to test. > See the list for patches, which are published for public testing. > This happens for exactly the purpose that the commiter thinks it has > some risky nature. I thought that was the whole point of CURRENT/BETA/RC? You can either hope that the committer will eventually find someone with same/similar hardware and that they're willing to experiment with it (although, why would anyone try running something that is considered risky on a production system is beyond me), *or* you can force everyone ot test it (given they have the right hardware) and push it into CURRENT or the next BETA where people expect to have glitches in... Igor