Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2022 20:45:56 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?Q?Fernando_Apestegu=C3=ADa?= <fernando.apesteguia@gmail.com> To: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@freebsd.org> Cc: Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com>, Cy Schubert <cy@freebsd.org>, "ports-committers@FreeBSD.org" <ports-committers@freebsd.org>, dev-commits-ports-all@freebsd.org, dev-commits-ports-main@freebsd.org Subject: Re: git: c112b84fd807 - main - Revert "x11/fvwm3: Fix FvwmIconMan module segfault" Message-ID: <CAGwOe2ZH-zxT9kD0EOBb2YV=7v=UraEuij-pXJsW278Kyc27CA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <YtbveESiFVk52mA8@FreeBSD.org> References: <202207191334.26JDYhAw010500@gitrepo.freebsd.org> <YtbrUdyCPAlM6dCZ@FreeBSD.org> <20220719174000.E7F92130@slippy.cwsent.com> <YtbveESiFVk52mA8@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--000000000000cb0b9d05e42ce554 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable El mar., 19 jul. 2022 19:53, Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@freebsd.org> escribi= =C3=B3: > On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 10:40:00AM -0700, Cy Schubert wrote: > > In message <YtbrUdyCPAlM6dCZ@FreeBSD.org>, Alexey Dokuchaev writes: > > > On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 01:34:43PM +0000, Cy Schubert wrote: > > > > commit c112b84fd8076a19f30f0705a3c139ef360b101e > > > > > > > > Revert "x11/fvwm3: Fix FvwmIconMan module segfault" > > > > > > > > The maintainer misunderstood the meaning of the maintainer-feedbac= k > > > > flag in bugzilla. > > > > > > This still does not explain if the fix was wrong or not. If it's > wrong, > > > it should've been explained in the commit log, if it's correct then h= ow > > > does reverting it help? > > > > The fix was not wrong. According to the maintainer, the patch fixed the > > bug. > > I presume that anyone who committed this did read the code and made a > clear judgment whether it was correct or not, prior to committing. > > > The maintainer didn't want it committed yet so more people could test i= t. > > I don't see how this can work: those who'd hit the segfault would confirm= , > those who'd not would not. How does it help? There's either a bug in th= e > code or not. At this point it looks like a fix was reverted only to be > recommitted again, resulting in nothing but a needless repochurn. :-/ > Or not. Maybe the fix didn't fix the issue completely or created a new one. That's why the maintainer wanted confirmation first. The committer mixed up two fields. That happens. We're human beings. I think our repo can keep up with two extra commits :-) > ./danfe > --000000000000cb0b9d05e42ce554 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"auto"><div><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" = class=3D"gmail_attr">El mar., 19 jul. 2022 19:53, Alexey Dokuchaev <<a h= ref=3D"mailto:danfe@freebsd.org">danfe@freebsd.org</a>> escribi=C3=B3:<b= r></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border= -left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 10:40:00AM -= 0700, Cy Schubert wrote:<br> > In message <YtbrUdyCPAlM6dCZ@FreeBSD.org>, Alexey Dokuchaev writ= es:<br> > > On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 01:34:43PM +0000, Cy Schubert wrote:<br> > > > commit c112b84fd8076a19f30f0705a3c139ef360b101e<br> > > > <br> > > >=C2=A0 Revert "x11/fvwm3: Fix FvwmIconMan module segfaul= t"<br> > > > <br> > > >=C2=A0 The maintainer misunderstood the meaning of the mainta= iner-feedback<br> > > >=C2=A0 flag in bugzilla.<br> > ><br> > > This still does not explain if the fix was wrong or not.=C2=A0 If= it's wrong,<br> > > it should've been explained in the commit log, if it's co= rrect then how<br> > > does reverting it help?<br> > <br> > The fix was not wrong. According to the maintainer, the patch fixed th= e<br> > bug.<br> <br> I presume that anyone who committed this did read the code and made a<br> clear judgment whether it was correct or not, prior to committing.<br> <br> > The maintainer didn't want it committed yet so more people could t= est it.<br> <br> I don't see how this can work: those who'd hit the segfault would c= onfirm,<br> those who'd not would not.=C2=A0 How does it help?=C2=A0 There's ei= ther a bug in the<br> code or not.=C2=A0 At this point it looks like a fix was reverted only to b= e<br> recommitted again, resulting in nothing but a needless repochurn. :-/<br></= blockquote></div></div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">Or not= . Maybe the fix didn't fix the issue completely or created a new one. T= hat's why the maintainer wanted confirmation first.</div><div dir=3D"au= to"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">The committer mixed up two fields. That hap= pens. We're human beings. I think our repo can keep up with two extra c= ommits :-)</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><di= v dir=3D"auto"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote"= style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> <br> ./danfe<br> </blockquote></div></div></div> --000000000000cb0b9d05e42ce554--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAGwOe2ZH-zxT9kD0EOBb2YV=7v=UraEuij-pXJsW278Kyc27CA>