> >> Is there a reason not to take LED fixes if they fix a bug and don't > >> cause a regression? Sure, we can draw some arbitrary line, maybe > >> designate some subsystems that are more "important" than others, but > >> what's the point? > > > >There's a tradeoff. > > > >You want to fix serious bugs in stable, and you really don't want > >regressions in stable. And ... stable not having 1000s of patches > >would be nice, too. > > I don't think we should use a number cap here, but rather look at the > regression rate: how many patches broke something? > > Since the rate we're seeing now with AUTOSEL is similar to what we were > seeing before AUTOSEL, what's the problem it's causing?
Regression rate should not be the only criteria. More patches mean bigger chance customer's patches will have a conflict with something in -stable, for example. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
Description: Digital signature