[Bug 105301] The big SKQP bug

[bugzilla-daemon at freedesktop.org]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105301

--- Comment #51 from Kenneth Graunke <kenneth at whitecape.org> ---
(In reply to Aditya Swarup from comment #49)
> Why are we saying that "We may lift that restriction in the future" when we
> are not going to do it?

No one has said that we're not going to do it.  People need to think through
the ramifications and make sure that it's safe to do so - or if there's
additional work required for correctness (beyond fixing one unit test).

(In reply to Dongseong Hwang from comment #50)
> In my opinion, Intel has no excuse to Google about this conformance test
> failure, and a major product has been broken.

Thank you for the analysis.  I believe you're correct that we should allow
this.  The specs were fairly new when we first implemented this, and there were
very few users, so it makes sense that we'd need to adjust things now that it's
in more widespread use.

Please avoid grandstanding about how we're "breaking major products", "have no
excuse", and other implications that we're doing a terrible job.  In the open
source world, it only makes people less likely to care about your problem and
listen to you.  Thank you.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-3d-bugs/attachments/20181107/5ed54485/attachment.html>