On 4 Nov 2014, at 12:10, Glyph <gl...@twistedmatrix.com> wrote: > > On the gripping hand, many of these regressions have been outstanding for > months, and so if we could get these fixed promptly enough, presumably we > would have done that already.
This is mainly why I am in favour of this plan. They’re not small fixes, so we can’t just mop them up in a day. > > Delaying the revert is likely to just make things more painful. Tempting as > it is to suggest, bitter experience has taught me that trying to cram things > into a release is a recipe for sadness. *cough* 14.0 *cough* :) > So rather than asking if you could hold off, could I instead make two > requests for this feature: > > • Can please we do reviews of the fixes to the regressions as if they > were landing on trunk, and not have this revert re-open the need to review > the entire (rather large) change? How are we going to manage this? Do we need an “alternate” branch, which consists of #6750 + all the regression fixes, and the “review” is making sure that all of the known regressions are fixed? Or do we remerge it as a “private” API, maybe, so that we can still fit it mostly into our dev process? Or do we do a tubes and just spin it off into another thing of its own, then merge it when it’s finished? I’m not sure. > • If we can manage to get this feature landed again quickly after 14.1, > will you have time to do a fast-following 14.2? As long as it’s not the 22nd of November or the weekend of the 7th of Dec (the former of which will be spent in a drunk stupor and the latter is my birthday), I can do it no problem. - hawkie
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Twisted-Python mailing list Twisted-Python@twistedmatrix.com http://twistedmatrix.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/twisted-python
