Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > The reason for the "only regression" period is to avoid more > regressions. If you show me how any of the fixes I sent in this series > could potentially cause a regression, I already said that "You can see these patches are so trivially correct" is not a valid argument. The original patches would also have been looked correct when they were sent to the list. Things take time and actual use by the users to mature. >> You cannot be both. Which is it? > > I marked the patch that fix a regression as such, I marked the patches > that are obvious fixes with no possibility of regressions as such, and > I marked the trivial cleanups with no possibility of regressions as > such. I think you mean 6/10 by "the patch that fix a regression", but if that is the case, please send only the regression fix that cleanly apply to the tip of 'master', without any other dependencies, with a proper description of what breaks and how it fixes. We know you can do better than "certain" and "might". > In certain situations we might end up pushing garbage revisions (e.g. in > a rebase), and the patches to deal with that haven't been merged yet. > > So let's disable forced pushes by default. Thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html