[Mesa-dev] A proposal for new testing requirements for stable releases

[Michel Dänzer]

On 16.07.2014 06:16, Carl Worth wrote:
> Michel Dänzer <michel at daenzer.net> writes:
> 
> Quite frankly, my real concern with all of this is not that the driver
> maintainers will propose something bad, but that I will inadvertently
> botch something while cherry-picking or merging a conflict, etc. that I
> won't be able to notice in my touch testing.

[...]

> But my proposal was not intended to make that a requirement. You can
> continue to get your commits in with no additional testing on your part,
> by just affirming for each release that you're OK with what the
> stable-branch maintainer has put together.
> 
> When I phrase things that way, does it seem more reasonable to you?
> 
> And if this feels like a more bureaucratic means for doing nothing
> effectually different than what we did before, please humor me.

It does seem like that to me.


> (Maybe I'm just a wimp, but it's been tough at times to trust myself to
> resolve conflicts in code that I know I don't have any way to test. I do
> ask for help if the conflict looks really messy. But I don't like to
> bother people for things that look trivial. And even the trivial, manual
> conflict resolution can give me misgivings that I might be breaking the
> release.)

I'm fine with you asking the patch author or another developer of the
affected subsystem for a backport if there is any conflict, however trivial.


-- 
Earthling Michel Dänzer            |                  http://www.amd.com
Libre software enthusiast          |                Mesa and X developer

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 234 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-dev/attachments/20140716/43e053c3/attachment.sig>