sm-commit AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Source Mage code commit list
List archive
Re: [SM-Commit] PERFORCE change 78878 by Ladislav Hagara for review
- From: Andrew <afrayedknot AT thefrayedknot.armory.com>
- To: Ladislav Hagara <ladislav.hagara AT unob.cz>
- Cc: SM-Commit Daemon <sm-commit AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [SM-Commit] PERFORCE change 78878 by Ladislav Hagara for review
- Date: Fri, 5 May 2006 11:51:01 -0700
On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 07:45:02PM +0200, Ladislav Hagara wrote:
> >Couple problems here:
> >This bug (11018) does not have an integrate to stable flag, is this a
> >security fix? Why is this exempt from normal process?
> >
> >More than just the fix for bug 11018 was integrated (supposed to
> >cherry-pick the minimal changeset) KEYWORDS was not necessary for bug
> >11018 to be fixed.
<snip>
> Andrew, we both know we have different opinions about new features and
> about next developing of our distro. However we both want the same, the
> better distro. So please, do not provoke me.
Please dont take it personally. I dont have anything against you. I'd have
sent the same email to any of the other devs with stable access. I want
the distro to be better as well. That is why I agree that integrations
to stable should be QA'd. Everyone makes mistakes. Sure maybe your change
was simple enough that theres no problem, but where do you draw the line?
This wasnt intended as a personal attack, please dont infer that it
was. I never said anything directly to you. I framed all my
questions around the bug, not you.
If I was attacking you, instead of
"this bug does not have an integrate to stable flag"
I would have said
"*you* did not use the integrate to stable flag"
instead of
"why is this exempt from normal process"
I would have said
"why are *you* exempt from normal process"
instead of
"more than just the fix for bug 11018 was integrated ..."
I would have said
"*you* integrated more than was necessary for bug 11018 to be fixed"
You're very sensitive to email, I did everything I could to make
the email as neutral as possible. I apologize that it was not enough.
-Andrew
-
[SM-Commit] PERFORCE change 78878 by Ladislav Hagara for review,
Perforce Review Daemon, 05/04/2006
-
Re: [SM-Commit] PERFORCE change 78878 by Ladislav Hagara for review,
Andrew Stitt, 05/05/2006
- Re: [SM-Commit] PERFORCE change 78878 by Ladislav Hagara for review, Jeremy Blosser (emrys), 05/05/2006
-
Re: [SM-Commit] PERFORCE change 78878 by Ladislav Hagara for review,
Ladislav Hagara, 05/05/2006
-
Re: [SM-Commit] PERFORCE change 78878 by Ladislav Hagara for review,
Arwed von Merkatz, 05/05/2006
- Re: [SM-Commit] PERFORCE change 78878 by Ladislav Hagara for review, Jeremy Blosser (emrys), 05/05/2006
- Re: [SM-Commit] PERFORCE change 78878 by Ladislav Hagara for review, Andrew, 05/05/2006
-
Re: [SM-Commit] PERFORCE change 78878 by Ladislav Hagara for review,
Arwed von Merkatz, 05/05/2006
-
Re: [SM-Commit] PERFORCE change 78878 by Ladislav Hagara for review,
Andrew Stitt, 05/05/2006
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.