On Sat, Jul 04, 2020 at 02:42:53PM +0200, Tim Düsterhus wrote: > Willy, > > Am 04.07.20 um 12:11 schrieb Willy Tarreau: > > Thank you. I now rebased next and applied your series on top of it. I'm > > not going to review what goes into -next, or it defeats the purpose of > > using it as a pending queue. There's enough time so that anyone can > > suggest a change and even if some issues get merged, we have 6 months > > to spot them till next release. > > Okay, fair enough. Just make sure to read the backporting information > when moving next to master after the release. For some of the patches > backporting might make sense, for others not so much. > > But I suppose those are going to be treated just like regular BUGs and > will automatically be presented during the backporting sessions?
Absolutely. We read each and every single commit message during backports to gauge whether it's relevant or not and if it depends on other patches or not (or what's the impact of not taking it if it's too painful/dangerous to backport). That's why I'm annoying with those commit messages :-) > 15 emails per hour is one every 4 minutes. If I'd be sending emails at > that rate I'd just use an actual chat :-) Except when they're to different people and on various subjects because you're responding to accumulated stuff while you're waiting for a test to finish or for someone to fix an issue that's blocking you. In short, e-mail allows asynchronous batch processing which is super important to limit inefficient context switching. Willy
