I think best of all would be the good discipline not to break the tree in the first place.
Is this something that Repoman could have caught? If no, should it in the future? On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 11:30 AM, Mike Frysinger <vap...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On 03 Feb 2016 22:35, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > > Am Dienstag, 2. Februar 2016, 02:33:30 schrieb Mike Frysinger: > > > > I took the liberty of doing (2) and reverted the commit. Not sure why > > > > this needs so much discussion; after all a broken tree is always > > > > suboptimal. > > > > > > unless things are on fire (which i don't think this was), i don't > > > generally clamor for 0-day fixes. if we can find a better fix in > > > a day or so, then i'm happy for that. i dislike repos with history > > > that is just a constant stream of land, revert, land, revert, land. > > > > > > not that i'm saying your revert was wrong ... just airing my > > > general personal preferences. > > > > You're right of course... but there's one thing we have to keep in mind. > > > > We're not running a project were releases are made from the vcs. The vcs > *is* > > the release... and whatever is out there gets pushed to users. > > > > This is why my personal preference is more to revert if I'm not sure > that the > > fix will happen soon. > > which is why you weigh the impact on users. how many people are actually > affected and for how long ? in this case, fairly sure no actual user saw > the failure on their system. > -mike >
