On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 3:10 AM Henrik K <[email protected]> wrote: > Sorry but I still don't agree at all. First and most important tester is > _you_. Don't commit stuff that may break things in production.
I thought active.list might break but otherwise thought it was a good patch. I forgot about eval rules. > Especially when done > in small batches over time, which makes no sense for review purposes. We will agree to disagree. I wanted a roadmap to how to do the rest of the work so I didn't have to redo thousands of lines of changes. So picking one small change makes sense to me. > > Sorry but no, a branch will just hide issues. We need to find bugs. > > So put this issue to an actual vote and wait for all the votes, instead of > sounding like a dictator. > Never my intent to be a dictator and I did get votes on the work I did. If you want a vote on a branch, just call one. I respected the discussion in the bugzilla and considered it a vote, did I note? Disagreeing is not the same as being a dictator and I voted just like everyone else. Technically, I don't think a branch would help because rules are only in trunk, masscheck/ruleqa only runs on trunk, and hence, changes would be needed there even with a branch. But I'll +1 a vote to move active development to a 4.0 branch and changing only rules on trunk so trunk stays as stable as it can while 4.0 branch can be able to be more of a normal development branch with the risk inherent therein. I think that will risk trunk getting out of sync and stale but that might be a benefit if stability is a desire. > > But anyway, I'm so over this.. I will not be a part of this and not reply > anymore. But if you break my trunk installation, I will be angry. > No one is trying to break anyone's trunk installation and I don't want to see you angry. Regards, KAM
