Re: Nautilus hard code freeze break request

[Vincent Untz <vuntz gnome org>]

Le mercredi 17 septembre 2008, à 14:37 +0200, Christian Neumair a écrit :
> Am Mittwoch, den 17.09.2008, 14:13 +0200 schrieb Vincent Untz:
> > I'm mixed on this one -- it's minor, but the patch is simple. I'm
> > giving a small first approval.
> 
> I wonder why there is such a strict policy. Minor fixes are fixes as
> well, especially for applications that are frequently used and seen by
> the end users.
> 
> Isn't the purpose of the hard code freeze to review all changes such
> that no new scary last-minute bugs are introduced? Instead, it seems
> that just “major” fixes are considered, i.e. fixes for crashers - which
> fortunately have not been an issue for Nautilus for some time.
> 
> The result in the Nautilus case is that the user-perceived quality of
> the 2.24.0 release will suffer, and once hard code freeze is over, we
> will see lots of postponed commits on my behalf to the stable branch.
> I.e. we are essentially supporting the “X.0 releases do have many
> glitches - let's wait for X.1” prejudice.

Even having a review from two release team doesn't guarantee that the
patch is good. The thing is that not a lot of people will test what you
commit now. So everything we do at this point is risky, and that's why
we usually prefer to live with minor annoyances. It certainly has
happened in the past to have a regression in .0 compared to the .92
release, and we want to avoid this.

If a bug is a regression compared to the previous stable release, then
please state so: it will certainly be taken into account. But else, it's
not related to the X.0/X.1 prejudice -- that's just a result of our fast
development schedule.

(also, we approved a few changes for nautilus that are not fixes for
crashers)

Vincent

-- 
Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés.