[Gnu-arch-users] Re: Why PQMs count

[Florian Weimer]

* Tom Lord:

> But, keep looking.  The punch-line comes a few messages later when
> Mark says:
>
>     It is not acceptable to completely ignore this kind of breakage 
>     indefinitely.  Two months is far too long.
>
> "Two months".   Implying that there is a shorter period of time that
> is _not_ "far too long".

There's an explicit procedure for that:

| Patch Reversion
| 
| If a patch is committed which introduces a regression on any target
| which the Steering Committee considers to be important and if:
| 
|     * the problem is reported to the original poster;
| 
|     * 48 hours pass without the original poster or any other party
|       indicating that a fix will be forthcoming in the very near
|       future;
| 
|     * two people with write privileges to the affected area of the
|       compiler determine that the best course of action is to revert
|       the patch;
| 
| then they may revert the patch. [...]

<http://gcc.gnu.org/develop.html>

> Now do you see where the mainline is for these folks?  It's a thing
> you don't want to be two-months behind but, on the other hand, you can
> break it for up to two months before you're in serious trouble.

48 hours is too much for most problems related to bootstrapping on
important problems.  Such problems tend to be fixed quickly, though.

-- 
Current mail filters: many dial-up/DSL/cable modem hosts, and the
following domains: bigpond.com, di-ve.com, fuorissimo.com, hotmail.com,
jumpy.it, libero.it, netscape.net, postino.it, simplesnet.pt, spymac.com,
tiscali.co.uk, tiscali.cz, tiscali.it, voila.fr, yahoo.com.