Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 13:10:53 -0700 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> To: njs3@doc.ic.ac.uk (Niall Smart) Cc: Studded <Studded@san.rr.com>, ac199@hwcn.org, Ruslan Ermilov <ru@ucb.crimea.ua>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@FreeBSD.ORG>, nick@foobar.org, freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Problem reports closed by Poul-Henning Kamp [was: Re: misc/6712] Message-ID: <13370.895954253@time.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 23 May 1998 20:23:35 BST." <E0ydJtH-0003UD-00@oak66.doc.ic.ac.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I 100% agree with you Doug, I use -stable exclusively here, and when > I find a bug I usually take the time out to research it and produce a > quality bug report, or if its within my means, a patch. Obviously after > expending this effort I want to see it committed to -stable as well as > -current, otherwise submitting bug reports is of no benefit to me. The chief problem with getting stuff merged into -stable is NOT, however, one of getting good bug reports. People are doing a fine job of submitting PRs and that's a good thing. What the committers (with a few noble exceptions) have traditionally shown themselves unwilling to do is MERGE those changes, usually leaving it to someone like me to grapple with 30+ MB of diffs every time a release comes up. If some committers wanted to appoint themselves as an informal "merge committee", that would be just great and would probably save my sanity for a little while longer. Well, OK, maybe it's too late for that, but it would at least save me a lot of WORK and that's even better than sanity. :-) - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?13370.895954253>