On Fri, 12 Jul 2013, Willy Tarreau wrote:
And maybe in the end, having 1/10 patch cause a regression is not *that* dramatic, and probably less than not fixing the 9 other bugs. In one case we rely on -stable to merge the 10 fixes, and on the other case we'd rely on -stable to just revert one of them.
Apologies for the late post, I'm catching up on things, but this jumped out at me.
We went through a LOT of pain several years ago when people got into the mindset that a patch was acceptable if it fixed more people than it broke. eliminating that mindset did wonders for kernel stability.
Regressions are a lot more of a negative than bugfixes are a positive, a 10:1 ratio of fixes to regressions is _not_ good enough.
David Lang -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html