From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38622) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Wj131-0001pm-86 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 10 May 2014 02:46:20 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Wj12w-0000MT-1a for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 10 May 2014 02:46:15 -0400 Received: from speedy.comstyle.com ([2001:470:1d:8c::2]:42559 helo=mail.comstyle.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Wj12v-0000MG-TM for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 10 May 2014 02:46:09 -0400 Message-ID: <536DCAF4.2040507@comstyle.com> Date: Sat, 10 May 2014 02:45:08 -0400 From: Brad Smith MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <536B9900.2010108@comstyle.com> <536D5EA2.30307@comstyle.com> <536D6994.2090404@comstyle.com> <8761le6tfz.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> In-Reply-To: <8761le6tfz.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] QEMU build broken List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Markus Armbruster Cc: Peter Maydell , Riku Voipio , qemu-devel On 10/05/14 2:25 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Brad Smith writes: > >> On 09/05/14 7:35 PM, Peter Maydell wrote: >>> On 10 May 2014 00:02, Brad Smith wrote: >>>> On 08/05/14 10:54 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: >>>>> Ah, bsd-user. Do you actually use it, or is it just >>>>> in the default compile that you're running? >>> >>>> I do not use it personally but it is common sense that commits >>>> must not be breaking the build. >>> >>> I generally agree, but the minor ports (roughly, anything >>> not x86 Linux) are inevitably going to get broken from time >>> to time, because not everybody has access to all those >>> systems to test on. bsd-user is particularly bad because >>> it is a large chunk of code only built for BSD and it's >>> not really maintained right now. (Hence my interest in >>> whether it actually has users or if we're just carrying >>> around a big lump of dead weight code.) >> >> This is just excuses and points out poor project process. >> There could easily be a staging branch to deal with this. > > Having your feature in-tree is a privilege, not a right. You earn it by > helping to maintain it. "it's not really maintained right now" means it > has not been earning its keep. You're encouraged to remedy that. Huh? "my feature"? I have nothing to do with this. What kind of crazy is this? How to misdirect and not take responsibility for breaking something. If there wasn't sloppy irresponsible development in the first place it wouldn't be an issue. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.