Henrik Nordström wrote:
fre 2010-05-21 klockan 09:37 -0600 skrev Alex Rousskov:
I do not really know what you mean. If you are comfortable with your
changes, post your changes for review, and nobody objects to a commit,
you should commit your changes to trunk.
In this case I am happy to have Kinkie review his own changes. It's not
likely anyone else of us will spot issues in proposed autoconf changes
before they hit trunk.
Reviewing large, complex changes is also difficult but I
would still prefer to review and commit self-contained changes.
Sure. Any change which goes to trunk should be self-contained and not
require further changes to actually work the way intended.
Regards
Henrik
Agreed on both.
Kinkie, perhapse if you aimed for doing audit submits just prior to the
weekends with a short summary of which configure options have been
touched, we could synchronize some short period for us to test before it
gets committed to trunk for full use. The full 10-day (or more) delay
only happens if another dev can't +1 the change.
Though of course if there are any doubts in your mind about a change
skip a weeks submission rather than rushing in incompletely tested
change in.
The last two bumps were annoying to some, yes. But they were to be
expected with such a low-level set of changes and were less impact than
I personally was expecting to have to deal after the fallout we had on
previous attempts.
Amos
--
Please be using
Current Stable Squid 2.7.STABLE9 or 3.1.3
