Pete Wyckoff <p...@padd.com> writes:
>> The description for [PATCH 5/5] blames v1.7.9-rc0~4^2~1, which tells
>> me it is the latter. And if that were the case, and if this were in
>> the area of the system I oversee, I wouldn't push it to the upcoming
>> release at this late in the cycle, when I do not know what other
>> things it might break while fixing this bug (in other words, a fix
>> to an old bug is not an execuse to introduce a regression).
>> But git-p4 is not in my area, so if you meant this should go in the
>> upcoming 1.7.12 release, I'll queue them directly on 'master'.
>> Please tell me what your preference is.
> Good point about "already released bugs". I confirmed it was
> broken in 1.7.11 too, so there's no reason to rush this fix into
> 1.7.12. If you could queue it up in pu, that would be great.
OK, I've done so already last night when I wrote my message but
haven't pushed the result out yet.
Note (primarily to other people) that the above exchange does not
mean "a fix to an old bug is automatically disqualified during the
rc freeze period". If the fix is so focused and obvious that there
is no way the change inadvertently and negatively affects other code
and introduce a new bug, it is perfectly fine to apply the fix any
time. I don't know git-p4 well enough to tell if this five patch
series was in that "obviously safe" category myself, so I asked Pete
to decide it for me.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html