On May 26, 2014, at 10:13 PM, Konstantin Serebryany <konstantin.s.serebry...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Mon, 2014-05-26 at 10:36 +0400, Konstantin Serebryany wrote: >>> Because this is my default reply to any such case. :) >> >> I hope that is a humorous reply and not a serious one. > > Not really humorous. Our position is and always was
We don’t expect a guarantee that you keep code working. Only that when _you_ break things that you try and help out as you can, and if you cannot, merely to ask others for help. Doesn’t seem to me to be an unreasonable position and seems to have worked fairly well for the past 27 years. So, the right way to treat a regression that you hear about from the gcc side, is exactly the same way you handle a green to red transition on a build bot. So, let me ask, when you break a build bot, is your first response to want to disable the port the regression is found with? If not, then why treat the regression found on the gcc side any different?
