From owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Fri Aug 30 00:05:24 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EF80E3D82; Fri, 30 Aug 2019 00:05:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from carpeddiem@gmail.com) Received: from mail-io1-f54.google.com (mail-io1-f54.google.com [209.85.166.54]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46KKVq23Pbz4Nyd; Fri, 30 Aug 2019 00:05:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from carpeddiem@gmail.com) Received: by mail-io1-f54.google.com with SMTP id t6so10519715ios.7; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 17:05:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=URxnojM7DYm+fSQKO6xIxHE6v96bixxiCb42ycf6FKo=; b=lUbR8XSKlXf2nIXW6/6wJaQU1Xl2x5sbTxMLHSjPzCe7Tpn0obN+y8VlB6UsrcVxpJ P2IwsOznnyxPnjeuu3Kxk5ylU6bg9swQriXISx3+mNufaGfqYUTCFgjiA3KvH+137aqj 2aY5dlkicc9fIy5pKBvMVPJyPoZ0zBRmzbbWILPnysim7jhittO8/S049ZEFaOfU8Drz XP/NLZnc41sOcG63I2hucqby6SMcn8tH4TFNGgmXCRTbSxdwvFbnGyL7t5gg9aHOtUv1 OIEK3DobKxfQoKzNyEPsLlGhMBsXHsn1QauoAH04tXXkd8TACGGtsI/Ld+fthwO8Yyqh 0FbQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVJobdFZ90xNN/ndidBr8AvkZMrlNIrH/HnQ6JfoaIvXLqlr7wE 7Rq/x2bkN6Y44CEpTLgPjsDi7nUe0x+tBNaDri1buA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqx0xvT5UR1XEZJhksJ4+mAwv4OS2uxkMCylQPLys5IW+ibcg9+8XtHj4VFYPV5wH9feBFo/B/RHzSEMMXXPzRU= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:ea16:: with SMTP id m22mr8361491ioc.115.1567123522546; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 17:05:22 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <201908291905.x7TJ5Bw8091371@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> In-Reply-To: <201908291905.x7TJ5Bw8091371@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> From: Ed Maste Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 20:05:06 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: FCP 20190401-ci_policy: CI policy To: "Rodney W. Grimes" Cc: FreeBSD Hackers , fcp@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46KKVq23Pbz4Nyd X-Spamd-Bar: ----- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of carpeddiem@gmail.com designates 209.85.166.54 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=carpeddiem@gmail.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-5.46 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:209.85.128.0/17]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[freebsd.org]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.99)[-0.993,0]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[54.166.85.209.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.0]; IP_SCORE(-2.46)[ip: (-6.60), ipnet: 209.85.128.0/17(-3.34), asn: 15169(-2.32), country: US(-0.05)]; FORGED_SENDER(0.30)[emaste@freebsd.org,carpeddiem@gmail.com]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:209.85.128.0/17, country:US]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[emaste@freebsd.org,carpeddiem@gmail.com]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2019 00:05:24 -0000 On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 at 15:05, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: > > 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!. Let me echo Rod here. I'm also very happy that this statement was made by one of the original FreeBSD committers. Reverting a change is not an insult, not a punishment, not something bad - it's simply an acknowledgement that some aspect of the change didn't meet expectations.