Hi,
On 15-03-18 09:14, Lukas Wunner wrote:
On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 08:49:04AM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
On 14-03-18 23:38, Lukas Wunner wrote:
On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 11:23:12PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
We're quite far into the cycle already and this is a serious regression,
also nothing of great value is lost by the revert, the original commit
was a minor cleanup which turns out to have bad side-effects, a simple
revert really is the best solution here, esp. in this point of the cycle.
Just an hour ago he sent me the patch to look over it. And we're at
least two and a half weeks away from v4.16.
No we are *only* two and a half weeks away from v4.16 (worst case scenario)
and Linus does not like getting last minute fixes.
That doesn't preclude allowing a few hours to discuss things.
There is never such a rush. In the present case, a new contributor
was willing to debug the issue and submit a patch. Onboarding new
contributors is important and IMO it's worth waiting a few days for
them to sort things out, even if it means a regression stays present
a little longer.
I completely agree that onboarding new contributors is important.
Regards,
Hans
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
