From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 1 11:31:24 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0375716A408; Tue, 1 May 2007 11:31:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bright@elvis.mu.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3DDC13C4BD; Tue, 1 May 2007 11:31:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bright@elvis.mu.org) Received: by elvis.mu.org (Postfix, from userid 1192) id EB9861A4DA1; Tue, 1 May 2007 04:31:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 04:31:55 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein To: Andrey Chernov , Mark Linimon , Roman Kurakin , src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Message-ID: <20070501113155.GD13868@elvis.mu.org> References: <20070430181824.GA83415@nagual.pp.ru> <20070430225717.GA7008@VARK.MIT.EDU> <20070501000242.GA19510@nagual.pp.ru> <20070501002817.GA887@nagual.pp.ru> <463690FE.9000209@inse.ru> <20070501010709.GA1304@nagual.pp.ru> <20070501013957.GX13868@elvis.mu.org> <20070501064828.GA3836@nagual.pp.ru> <20070501083032.GA9361@soaustin.net> <20070501084514.GA4889@nagual.pp.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070501084514.GA4889@nagual.pp.ru> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Cc: Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.sbin/sysinstall main.c X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 May 2007 11:31:24 -0000 Andrey, If the fallout from your changes broke a bunch of things in -current, then we can expect the fallout in -stable to be even worse. Your query about bug reports is a straw man as anticipating a lot of fallout which has already occured does not require that I actually have a bug report. The end result is more users being bitten because a discussion regarding this has obviously not taken place. And yes, you're being a jerk. :) -Alfred * Andrey Chernov [070501 01:45] wrote: > On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 03:30:32AM -0500, Mark Linimon wrote: > > On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 10:48:28AM +0400, Andrey Chernov wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 06:39:57PM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > > > > Using the strategy "commit to -current then suffer the fallout" > > > > is pretty bogus. > > > > > > The only possible. Nobody can run all ports at once. Kris already promise > > > all ports build results with those changes in, lets see. > > > > There have been many runs, in the past, with src changes put into the > > cluster and then tested, before the src changes were committed. This is > > the process that is always used to get new versions of gcc into the tree, > > for instance. > > This ones are not such vital as gcc changes which can break all programs > at once, so can't be ever nearly compared with. For what we have --current > for, if every change will go to the cluster first? > > And the question remains: > Is something currently broken _for_you_? I still have no reports. > > -- > http://ache.pp.ru/ -- - Alfred Perlstein