Hello David,
Thanks for the reply. I completely admit that there aren't many changes
going into this section of code. Unfortunately, we've had some nasty
breaks that took quite a long while to get fixed.
Can you point me in the direction of this kbuild test robot (URLs, etc)
so I can better understand if it makes sense to add tests there? For
example, do you know if it's "changed based" so only certain tests will
run if given files are updated?
--David
KI6ZHD
On 10/28/2017 06:45 PM, David Miller wrote:
From: David Ranch <linux-h...@trinnet.net>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 10:53:24 -0700
Does anyone else have thoughts on this topic?
I think you are making a mountain out of a mole hill.
If you care so much about this, set things up so that entities such as
the kbuild test robot run whatever tests you think are necessary.
Otherwise, continually test the stack yourself and report any
regressions here as fast as you can.
If soemone can't be bothered to verify or test someone's change in 2
or 3 days, except in extreme circumstances, I absolutely refuse to
burdon the submitter and let their patches rot in the queue.
That's unacceptable.
That's the proper way to deal with this, without unreasonably
burdoning people who just want to keep the code across the tree modern
and more up to date.
Thank you.
