|
From: | Paolo Bonzini |
Subject: | Re: [Qemu-stable] [PATCH 0/3] ARM: three easy patches for coverity-reported issues |
Date: | Fri, 21 Feb 2014 11:43:27 +0100 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 |
Il 21/02/2014 08:24, Michael Roth ha scritto:
> > You haven't defined breakage; what breakage deserves a change in a > stable release. Some interpret it as regression, some as "any bug", > some as "any crash bug", and so on.Personally I think it's fair to punt that determination to the stable maintainers: if it's a bug that existed in a previous release, however minor, and you or someone else cares enough to cc: qemu-stable about, it's a reasonable *candidate* for consideration.
I agree. Note that you added a very important condition: you or someone else *cares enough*.
The question under discussion is: can we define a kind of breakage that *any* maintainer should care enough about, and add a Cc: tag when committing the fix? How wide would/should that definition be?
Anyone else that "cares enough" can propose additional patches, even if the maintainer didn't tag it for stable in the commit. The maintainer should give their opinion when that happens, but that's not a part of the process that's under question.
Paolo
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |