Hello, On Tue 15 Jul 2025 at 07:43pm +01, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jul 2025 at 15:18:08 +0100, Sean Whitton wrote: >>It's not about speed, but about being able to set the bug aside. > > Yes, I was agreeing with you - like I said, grouping together all the work > into one "transaction" has value, and DELAYED enables that. > >>On Tue 15 Jul 2025 at 02:33pm +01, Simon McVittie wrote: >>> I'm not sure that I see a situation >>> where it would be rational to use DELAYED, but unacceptably slow to open BTS >>> bugs or MRs? > > When I said "unacceptably slow" I meant something more like latency rather > than time taken: it seemed to me as though there was a suggestion that we > should be choosing between proposing MRs (or patches) *or* doing a delayed > NMU, but in the scenarios where DELAYED is relevant, I'd prefer contributors > to consider sending a MR (or patch) *and* doing a delayed NMU. Right. Sounds like we don't disagree at all. -- Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
