On 19/06/2020 23:34, Tim Hudson wrote: > > > On Sat, 20 Jun 2020, 8:14 am Benjamin Kaduk, <ka...@mit.edu > <mailto:ka...@mit.edu>> wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 08:11:16AM +1000, Tim Hudson wrote: > > The general concept is to only fix serious bugs in stable releases. > > Increasing performance is not fixing a bug - it is a feature. > > Is remediating a significant performance regression fixing a bug? > > > It would be a bug - but not a serious bug. So no. > It works. It was released. I don't recall us ever saying that we would only fix serious bugs. AFAIK, if its a bug then we will fix it. IMO a serious performance regression would qualify, within reason (e.g. major rewrites of the assembler would not be ok). > Wholesale replacement of implementations of algorithms should not be > happening in LTS releases. This I agree with. Matt
- Backports to 1.1.1 and what is allowed Matt Caswell
- Re: Backports to 1.1.1 and what is allowed Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: Backports to 1.1.1 and what is allowe... Dr Paul Dale
- Re: Backports to 1.1.1 and what is allowed Kurt Roeckx
- Re: Backports to 1.1.1 and what is allowed Kurt Roeckx
- Re: Backports to 1.1.1 and what is allowe... Matt Caswell
- Re: Backports to 1.1.1 and what is al... Kurt Roeckx
- Re: Backports to 1.1.1 and what i... Tim Hudson
- Re: Backports to 1.1.1 and w... Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: Backports to 1.1.1 a... Tim Hudson
- Re: Backports to 1.1... Matt Caswell
- Re: Backports to 1.1... Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: Backports to 1.1... Tim Hudson
- Re: Backports to 1.1... Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: Backports to 1.1... Tomas Mraz
- Re: Backports to 1.1... Patrick Steuer
- Re: Backports to 1.1... Matt Caswell
- Re: Backports to 1.1... Salz, Rich
- Re: Backports to 1.1.1 and what i... Matt Caswell
- Re: Backports to 1.1.1 and what is allowed Nicola Tuveri
- RE: Backports to 1.1.1 and what is allowe... Dr. Matthias St. Pierre