Ingo Schwarze <[email protected]> wrote: > > So if we decide which of our interpretations should take precedence > > it might be a good idea to put it into snaps for a while. > > I don't think so in this case. Let's not over-use the feature of > putting stuff in snaps. I think that should be reserved for stuff > that is quite important and somewhat urgent and can't easily be > tested in a less disruptive way. But here, testing a program is > quite feasible once you know which program to test.
We know what needs testing, because it links against the library. Once the first set of base programs is tested to work well with the change, it is quite likely we have complete confidence it only improves the situation in ports. Snapshot testing is reserved for discovering unknown breakage, quickly. Like "we don't know how or which programs abuse something" or "what weird machines do people have" or "we don't know how our user's fingers work". It's not like our users are going to quickly discover a weird behaviour from ^C, considering I only noticed this decade-old problem in sftp a few days ago.
