On Mon, 2019-03-18 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Jansa wrote: > On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 12:49:17PM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote: > > Recently this issue came to light around some lttng* version > > upgrades. > > I do think that particular upstream is in keeping with what we'd > > need/want from a stable branch. > > There is also quite a bit of discussion related to recent boost > upgrade > in thud: > http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2019-March/280163.html
I personally don't think boost should have gone in and that was a mistake. It comes down to too few trying to do too much :(. Not sure whether we should try and back that out or not at this point... > > Does anyone strongly object to this? > > No objection from me, but it would be good to keep > "Requesting a fix in a stable branch" section mentioned in: > http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2019-March/280177.html > in mind even more while doing this. > > There is always a risk of breaking the stable branch even with minor > upgrade, so we shouldn't take all minor upgrades from newer branches > just because they exist - until someone asks for backport because of > security concerns or bugs found while using such stable branch. I think in the recent climate there is a strong case for kernel stable series or openssl, requested or not (presumably someone would request regardless). The boost change was an exception rather than the rule and to me its a sign we need to get better at review. I'm going to say something here and its not directed to Martin but to everyone. I personally get *really* depressed when people complain about the processes when it breaks for their personal situation. Some people like Armin and like myself try and juggle hundreds of patches and keep everyone happy. There has been a huge change in project resources and yet we're keeping going fairly unchanged. The fact quality hasn't totally collapsed is frankly quite amazing in some ways. There is huge pressure from people to get changes into stable quickly. I cannot get people to test changes in master for a time period before requesting backport. There is also huge pressure to accept no changes that break anything or impact any workflows. My personal answer to this has been to work on our testing, I've spent months trying to make things more efficient, increase coverage and better able to highlight problems. I don't see much other help/interest in it. I've also just spent a week away from home trying to explain to companies why they might care about us having servers for a decent test infrastructure (ideally to them we'd abstract it into the could and it would all happen by magic, paid for by ether). I guess my ask here is that as well as complaining to Armin and myself when we mess something up (sadly we are likely to do it again much as we might try not to), please also highlight to the people who depend on the project that we do need help with things like patch review and other resources e.g. YP membership. Cheers, Richard _______________________________________________ Openembedded-architecture mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-architecture
