Re: [PATCH] do not abort on broken .cpio file

["Yury V. Zaytsev" <yury shurup com>]

On Sun, 2009-11-01 at 03:02 +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:

> This wastes your time. Maybe it makes sense to allow
> trivial fixes to be applied without going through
> this process?

What are your suggestions on how would you track what, from where and
WHY gets into master, who reviewed the code before submission and
checked that it builds / does not introduce regressions then?

I agree that it takes time, but it does not *waste* time, because
afterward it makes much easier to figure out how and when a particular
regression or bug was introduced.

You think that your patch is trivial, but we have a record of one-liners
introducing very weird and hard to find regressions. Sometimes it takes
hours of bisecting to figure out what broke a particular feature...

Therefore, if you want to spare us some time, you are asked to create a
ticket in the tracker and attach your patches there, so that we won't
have to do it for you.
 
-- 
Sincerely yours,
Yury V. Zaytsev