Adrian Brock wrote:
On Wed, 2008-10-01 at 11:17 -0500, David M. Lloyd wrote:
> The thing I want to emphasize is that the burden should be on the
> breaker, not the one who reverts the patch, to do the extra branching and
> testing and so on.
>
Amen to that. :-)
I'd even go further. If there are multiple commits that are rolled back
because we don't know which one broke things, then once we find out
who it broke it, they should have to re-apply the patches for those
other innocent bystanders.
But then can we trust a serial build breaker to reapply somebody
else's patches correctly? ;-)
Quite the dilemma, perhaps fear of being placed in the iron maiden would
help.
--
Jason T. Greene
JBoss, a division of Red Hat