Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 15:41:10 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> To: Pedro Giffuni <pfg@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Guido Falsi <mad@madpilot.net>, svn-src-head@freebsd.org, Mikhail Teterin <mi@FreeBSD.org>, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r303047 - head/usr.bin/sed Message-ID: <20160802154110.GA22737@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <7f8c5c42-7d2f-ffcf-70dd-dbc9d3202ee7@FreeBSD.org> References: <201607192256.u6JMuewv007503@repo.freebsd.org> <20160802141738.GA84154@FreeBSD.org> <51d8013e-bc4b-a511-306d-0e362a8c3e86@madpilot.net> <7f8c5c42-7d2f-ffcf-70dd-dbc9d3202ee7@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 10:03:20AM -0500, Pedro Giffuni wrote: > Hello; > > [...] > Thank you for the reports, this type of things make nice cases for the > test suite. > > There were good reasons this patch was not meant for 11.0-RELEASE. Given > it's the second regression and I am not satisfied with the patch for the > first one, I will be reverting the change so we can look at the problems > integrally. >From a software engineer point, I fully support this decision. sed(1) is very important part of FreeBSD's repertoire, and any changes to it must not be committed unless fully understood and well tested (on a personal note, not being satisfied with the patch for the first [regression] is already a good enough reason for a backout -- merely IMHO). Thank you. ./danfe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20160802154110.GA22737>